2026-10-14 - Planning Commission

04:40The City of Reno Planning Commission

04:41meeting. Today's date is Wednesday,

04:43October 14th, 2026. The time is 6 p.m.

04:48We will begin with the uh pledge of

04:49allegiance.

04:51Miss Knox.

05:01for it stands

05:06with liberty and justice.

05:10>> Item A2 roll call. Madame clerk.

05:14>> David Jockman

05:15>> here.

05:16>> Jacob Williams

05:16>> here.

05:17>> Alex Belto

05:18>> here.

05:18>> Manny Bera

05:19>> here.

05:20>> Christina Delvar

05:21>> here.

05:21>> Sean McCoy

05:22>> here.

05:23>> Jan McKenzie. We have a quorum of the

05:25Reno City Planning Commission.

05:27>> Thank you. And right back to you, public

05:28comment.

05:29>> It should be noted for those in the

05:31audience that comments are to be

05:32addressed to the planning commission as

05:33a whole. Comments heard under this item

05:35will be limited to three minutes per

05:36person and may pertain to matters both

05:38on and off the planning commission

05:39agenda. Please note that the planning

05:41commission may not take action upon any

05:43matter not agendaized for possible

05:44action on today's agenda. When you are

05:46called on for public comment, please

05:48state your name for the record and begin

05:49speaking. The timer will begin when you

05:51say your name and you'll be afforded

05:52three minutes. If you're an attendee in

05:54the Zoom meeting and would like to make

05:55public comment at this time, please

05:56raise your hand. Lastly, while in this

05:58room, please be respectful. Warnings

06:00will be issued by the presiding officer

06:01if there's disruptive behavior and

06:03you'll be asked to leave chambers if the

06:04behavior continues. Our first public

06:07comment for item A3, general public

06:09comment, is for from Tony Harsh.

06:20Good evening, Tony Harsh. For the

06:22record, I'm doing this under public

06:24comment because you've got such a full

06:26agenda. And um just two things I'm uh

06:31going to talk about very briefly is I'm

06:33here um to listen to a very robust

06:37discussion regarding um Jacob's uh

06:40presentation on the skybridge. And so

06:43I'm interested to hear all of your

06:45opinions about that. I was on um the

06:48board with Scenic Nevada when that did

06:51go to um court and was ruled um there

06:54were some discussions that not that

06:56skybridge but about the arch down by the

06:58gold and silver. Um my other comments

07:01are about the ADUs accessory dwelling

07:04units. So you know I show up when we

07:06talk about those and you will be looking

07:09at a particular item on Thorn Hill. When

07:13I talked about it at the NAB, I said you

07:16should be questioning if there are any

07:18CCNRs on that property. And um I'm

07:23hoping that the applicant has looked at

07:26the CCNRs. I am going to present to the

07:28clerk the CCNRs that apply to that. Um

07:32they do have an architectural review

07:34committee, so I'm hoping that they've

07:36had an opportunity to take that to their

07:39neighborhood and discuss it. That's it.

07:41Have a great meeting. Thank you.

07:44>> Thank you, Tony.

07:46We do not have any other request to

07:48speak forms in person under general

07:49public comment. Um, we do not have

07:52anyone online with their hand raised for

07:54general public comment.

08:01>> Uh, thank you, Madam Clerk. We will now

08:02move on to the next item, which is

08:04approval of the agenda, and we have a

08:06request to speak from staff.

08:09>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record,

08:10Lauren Knox. So, we'd like to pull item

08:12C1 from tonight's agenda. Uh, we'd like

08:14for the updated bylaw item you all have

08:16been hearing about to be adopted first

08:18to provide some additional clarity on

08:20the use of alternate dates, alternate

08:22meeting dates. So, the calendar will

08:24then reflect kind of that discussion

08:25during the bylaw piece. So, we're going

08:27to pull the item off of tonight's agenda

08:28until the bout items heard. Thanks.

08:32>> Thank you, Miss Knox. Uh, do we have a

08:35request yet?

08:36>> Chair, I'd like to make a motion to

08:37approve the agenda with item C1 removed.

08:40>> Second. We have a motion and a second.

08:43We'll wait one minute. We have a motion

08:46and a second to approve tonight's

08:47agenda. Less item C1. All in favor say

08:50I.

08:51>> I.

08:52>> I.

08:52>> Any opposed?

08:53>> Hearing none. Motion carries

08:54unanimously. Now on to item A5, approval

08:57of the minutes from our 2nd September

09:002026 meeting.

09:02>> Commissioner Alto move to approve.

09:04>> Commissioner Williams second.

09:05>> Motion and [clears throat] second. All

09:06in favor say I.

09:08>> I. Any opposed?

09:10Hearing none. Motion

09:11>> Commissioner Biser abstain.

09:13>> Uh motion carries. Six with one

09:16abstension from Commissioner Bisera.

09:18That concludes item A5. On to item B,

09:21staff announcements. Back to you, Miss

09:22Knox.

09:23>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record,

09:24Lauren Knox. So, I do not have any

09:26announcements aside from that. Mr. Will

09:28be back next week. Thanks.

09:30>> Perfect.

09:32Our agenda has been approved without

09:34item C1. So, we will move in order

09:36tonight starting with our public

09:38hearings. Item D1. This is a staff

09:40report for possible action. Case number

09:42LDC27-000017

09:47uh grief America's conditional use

09:50permit. We will begin with a

09:52presentation from staff.

09:55>> Thank you, chair, members of the

09:57commission. For the record, my name is

09:58Leah Picotti and I am an associate

10:00planner with the city of Reno

10:01Development Services. Tonight I'm

10:04presenting two items. So Grife America's

10:07conditional use permit is the first one.

10:10So this particular request is located on

10:14a 66 acre site on the corner of Lear and

10:19Mount Anderson Ste Boulevard um kind of

10:23north of the 80 up in Ward 4. The

10:26request before you tonight is to allow

10:28for a manufacturing facility to operate

10:32between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00

10:34a.m. This site is within 300 ft of a

10:38residentially zoned property, which is

10:39why we're here tonight. It also includes

10:42non-residential development adjacent to

10:44or within 300 ft of a residentially

10:46zoned property. I should probably

10:48explain right off the bat that the

10:50footprint of the building is not being

10:51expanded. The only development are the

10:54installation of four silos on the back

10:57side of the building opposite where the

10:59residential zoning is.

11:02So this particular site is located in

11:05the industrial zoning district. Key

11:07issues that we looked at here are

11:09compliance with Reno municipal code and

11:11compatibility with surrounding

11:13developments and uses.

11:16give you a little bit of background on

11:18this. This is an existing building um

11:20approximately 420,000 square feet built

11:24in the late 80s, early 90s. There are

11:27two previous entitlements that were done

11:29on this property. One was done in 2022

11:32for a zoning map amendment to change it

11:34from mixeduse suburban to industrial.

11:37That was approved in 2022, which is why

11:40you're seeing that industrial

11:41designation today. And if this looks

11:43familiar to a few of you, it's because

11:45in 26 uh we processed an application for

11:50High Sierra Gas for hazardous materials

11:52on this site. That application was

11:55approved, but High Sierra Gas never

11:57moved on to the site and that

11:58application has subsequently expired at

12:01this time. So currently the facility um

12:07has another business that operates in

12:10the other 230,000 square ft and that

12:15business is a warehouse that was

12:17approved in May of 2023. It does operate

12:2124 hours and that is a legally

12:24established use.

12:26I need to point out that in January of

12:282025, we amended code to change from

12:32allowing warehousing in industrial

12:35districts 24 hours to it requires a CUP

12:39if you're within 300 ft of a residential

12:41zone. Hence why we're here. So, this new

12:46operation is 176,000 square ft of the

12:50main building. Um, it is subject to the

12:53current code standards, which is why it

12:55requires a conditional use permit today.

12:58It is within 300 ft of the residential

13:01zoning district. But only thing we're

13:04talking about today is that 176 square

13:07foot portion of the building. The rest

13:10of it not included in this.

13:13So on the screen before you now is kind

13:17of an overhead and you can see the

13:18footprint of that existing building.

13:21What is outlined in the dotted red there

13:23is that 176,000

13:26square feet that we are looking at

13:27today. So it is an existing industrial

13:30site. The applicant is planning on

13:33installing those silos. They are 59 feet

13:36tall. The zoning district allows a

13:40maximum height of 55 ft, but you can

13:44apply for a minor deviation to increase

13:46that by 10%. That's an administrative

13:49process. We went ahead and approved the

13:51minor deviation for that um separate

13:55from this so that it wasn't elevated to

13:57a major deviation and then cost them a

13:59whole bunch more money. But approval of

14:01that minor deviation is contingent upon

14:04tonight's um decision. So what you see

14:08in with the blue arrow there is the

14:11location of those four silos. It's kind

14:13of hard to tell because they're really

14:14tiny, but there are four little circles

14:16right there. And then the green arrow

14:18down on the bottom is the existing

14:20parking area. Now, this existing parking

14:23area was created back in the late 80s,

14:25early 90s. So, it doesn't conform to

14:27anything with current code standards.

14:29It's not screened from the street. It's

14:31not screened from the houses. Um,

14:34however, it is existing.

14:37So, what they're asking for is is Grafee

14:41is an indoor manufacturing of plastic

14:44packaging products. And my understanding

14:46of what I've been told is like the blue

14:4855gallon barrels we see around, they

14:51manufactured those. So that's the kind

14:53of stuff you're seeing here. They do

14:56want to operate 24/7. Um, their

14:58nighttime hours would be indoor only and

15:01we have conditioned that. They stated in

15:03their application that all shipping and

15:05receiving occurs between 6:00 am and 6

15:08pm. By code, it's allowed to occur from

15:116:00 am to 10 p.m. But we did uh put

15:15condition 8 in there, which limits truck

15:18activity, restricts idling, things like

15:21that. And that's a very common um

15:23condition of approval that we put on

15:2524-hour facilities just to uh kind of

15:28mitigate any kind of impact to those

15:30neighbors. Um, additionally, it has to

15:33meet the residential noise limits, uh,

15:35which is established in code as, uh, 65

15:39dB during the day and 49 dB at night.

15:42And that measurement would come from the

15:44edge of the residential zoning district.

15:47So, should we get any complaints in the

15:49future, that's where that would be

15:50measured from. Code will protect those

15:52neighbors based on those noise limits.

15:55And similarly we have um that no new

15:58exterior lighting uh can is being

16:01installed with this application and that

16:02all existing lighting must minimize

16:04spill is a little bit tough on this one

16:06because we have this existing business

16:08that's there and so

16:11and this is just a tenant that's coming

16:13into the 176,000 square foot. So, we

16:17didn't want to impose conditions that

16:19that business would be subject to, but

16:21that the existing business would not be

16:23subject to. So, regarding compatibility,

16:26you can see that residential zoning to

16:28the east, that existing parking lot is

16:30about 260 ft from the nearest residence.

16:35Um, again, it was a little bit tricky. I

16:37did look back at the enforcement history

16:39on this site, and we have never really

16:41had any complaints regarding that

16:43parking lot. There's never been anything

16:45about noise or anything like that. For

16:47the most part, we haven't really had any

16:48complaints at all on this property. I

16:51did receive one public comment from a

16:53neighbor that said that he had an issue

16:54back in 2023. He went over and talked to

16:56them. They immediately resolved it and

16:58there's never been a problem since then.

17:00So again, the parking area is 260 ft

17:05from the residential zone. We did put a

17:08condition of approval in there. It's

17:09condition number six [snorts] that

17:11states that if we receive complaints in

17:14the future about this parking area, it

17:17gives the administrator the power to go

17:19in and say, "Hey, you guys got to do

17:20something to fix this." So, while that

17:23condition is a little bit vague, um,

17:25basically what we're doing is

17:27establishing the fact that we can

17:28enforce that in the future if it becomes

17:31an issue. Um, this indoor manufacturing

17:35aligns with the established industrial

17:37character of the area. As you can see,

17:39we have industrial to the north, to the

17:41west, and uh mixeduse suburban to the

17:44south. Uh the construction hours to put

17:46up those silos have been limited. That's

17:48our normal limitations on you can only

17:51do it six days a week and only within

17:53these certain hours. No construction on

17:55Sundays. Um so that has also been added.

17:58The conditional use permit findings are

18:00on the board. Compatible and consistent

18:02with surrounding development. Yes, we

18:04have existing 24-hour uses in there. And

18:07this cup really just further mitigates

18:10any impact on nearby residential. Uh all

18:13public services and utilities are

18:15existing and available. Uh

18:17characteristics are compatible. Yes.

18:20Again, we have existing industrial all

18:22around. And based on our history and our

18:25enforcement history, there hasn't been

18:26anything that was materially detrimental

18:29to the public health, safety or welfare

18:31on this site. With that, the recommended

18:33motion is on the board. I'm available

18:35for questions. The applicant I believe

18:37is here virtually and is available for

18:39question. Oh, good. You're here. And um

18:41I don't believe they have a presentation

18:43though. So with that, that's it. Thank

18:45you.

18:46>> Thank you, Miss Piccotti. Hearing as

18:48though we will not have an applicant

18:49presentation, we will move to

18:50disclosures. Starting on my left,

18:53Commissioner Delvier.

18:54>> Commissioner Delvier, no disclosures.

18:56>> Commissioner Williams, no disclosures.

18:58>> Commissioner Jockman, same.

19:00>> Commissioner McKenzie, no disclosures.

19:03>> Commissioner McCoy, no disclosures.

19:05Commissioner Valto, same no disclosures.

19:08>> Commissioner Mera read reviewed material

19:10and I am familiar with the site.

19:13>> That concludes our disclosures. We will

19:15now go to public comment. Madame clerk,

19:17>> I do not have any request to speak forms

19:19in person and we do not have anyone

19:21online with their hand raised.

19:23>> Do we have any request to speak in

19:25chambers at this time? If so, please

19:27raise your hand.

19:29Seeing none, we will close public

19:31comment and move to questions from the

19:33commission.

19:39Commissioner Delvier,

19:41>> thank you. Um, Lead, a couple of

19:44questions for you.

19:47We And you talked about uh condition

19:50number six, and I just want to make sure

19:52that I understand it. So condition

19:55number six talks about this

19:57administrator who will potentially be

20:00able to mitigate some issues if anything

20:02comes up. But I wasn't clear who the

20:05administrator potentially was or how

20:08that sort of fits in long term and how

20:10residents or anyone else in the area can

20:13like what's the process for them if they

20:15want to complain.

20:16>> That's an excellent question. Again, Leo

20:18Picotti for the record. So the

20:19administrator is our department

20:22essentially. So, our department can look

20:24at these and you'll see in a lot of our

20:26conditions um we'll say subject to

20:29administrator review, subject to

20:31administrator approval. And what that

20:33basically means is that when they come

20:35in for building permits or when they

20:37come in for their business license, it

20:39gives us the ability to look at that one

20:41more time and make sure that they are

20:43doing what they said they were going to

20:45do. So in this particular case um if we

20:49had if any of these neighbors felt that

20:52this was a problem they could uh contact

20:56me directly. They could contact Reno

21:00direct. We have um online that can be

21:02done. It can be done through the email.

21:05It can be done via phone. People can um

21:09tell us their name or they can remain

21:11anonymous. And what would essentially

21:13happen is that code enforcement would

21:15probably get in touch with me or our

21:17department to say, "Hey, you know, this

21:19is what's going on. This site has a land

21:21use entitlement and then we would reach

21:24out to the applicants at that point and

21:25we would say this is a problem. It's it

21:28it is a problem and um we'd like to know

21:30how you'd like to fix that and we could

21:33work with the applicant at that point to

21:35come up with some sort of mitigation to

21:36fix that issue so that that complaint

21:38doesn't continue to come in."

21:39>> Perfect. Thank you so much. And then

21:41also if I understand correctly the it is

21:46within 300 ft of residence but the

21:48parking is 260 and then the residents

21:52themselves it's like 360 or something

21:54like that. That is correct. So okay I

21:56just wanted to make sure

21:57>> code has us measuring from the property

21:58line.

21:59>> Okay. Perfect. Thank you. And then one

22:01other question. Um and I think that you

22:04you answered that the there's 13 docks

22:06but they're on the northwest side. So

22:09they're behind kind of where the silos

22:11potentially will be. So correct.

22:13>> So there shouldn't be any

22:15>> necessarily noise regardless of when

22:17trucks are coming and going and things

22:18like

22:18>> Exactly. And it really shouldn't be any

22:20more than what it is now.

22:21>> Perfect. Thank you so much.

22:22>> You're welcome.

22:25>> Commissioner McCoy.

22:27>> Thank you, Chair. Commissioner McCoy. Um

22:29Miss Picotti, you just had a a

22:30clarifying question on condition 8. The

22:33slide mentioned uh deliveries between

22:356:00 a.m. and 6 pm. you indicated that

22:37the code actually allows for 6:00 a.m.

22:39to 10 p.m. So, I'm just kind of

22:41wondering if you could explain the

22:42purpose of condition 8. If the condition

22:45on uh number eight is 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.

22:49and that's already in code, why is that

22:52a condition? And and perhaps why is it

22:54not 6:00 a.m. to 6 p.m. for this

22:55particular uh project? Um that generally

22:59is because this is less than half of the

23:01building and the existing business

23:04that's in the other 230,000 square feet

23:07doesn't necessarily have the same

23:09restriction that this is. So we would

23:11have to somehow differentiate if there

23:14was deliveries after 6:00 p.m. and try

23:17to figure out which business it was. Um

23:20and that would just probably be

23:22something that we would have trouble

23:23enforcing being that it's allowed by

23:26right. um up until those hours. I uh we

23:30didn't necessarily think that it was

23:31necessary to restrict them to those

23:34hours when it's allowed for the other

23:36230 ft.

23:39>> Okay. So then can you explain the rest

23:40of the condition? If I'm just reading

23:43that first sentence is limiting 6 a.m.

23:45to 10 p.m. If that's code,

23:48you know, we don't even need that as a

23:50condition. That's just that's code. So

23:51what are we gaining by the rest of it in

23:53in your opinion? Why is that necessary

23:55for this project?

23:56>> It's a good question. I don't have the

23:57condition verbiage in front of me. Um,

23:59so I'd have to go and take a look at

24:01that. But if if it's limited 6 to 10,

24:05then that's what we generally limit

24:07indoor manufacturing to. And we tend to

24:09be consistent with those conditions of

24:11approval. Um, so that would be one of

24:14our general conditions of approval that

24:15we apply to manufacturing facilities who

24:18want to operate 24 hours. Lauren might

24:20have a little more to add to that.

24:21>> Sure. Thank you, Lauren Knox for the

24:22record. So just a little bit of more

24:24clarification. So that particular

24:25condition is talking about truck

24:27arrival, departures, on-site movement.

24:29So that is the kind of outdoor piece

24:31that's occurring. And so this condition

24:33limits that outdoor piece to 10 p.m. to

24:35try and still mitigate some of those

24:37impacts potentially to the surrounding

24:38neighbors. the actual 24-hour operation,

24:41right? This indoor piece, the indoor

24:42manufacturing, this is this is what

24:44we're approving here is that indoor

24:46piece to be able to still occur 24 hours

24:49with this condition limiting kind of

24:51what happens outside of of the property.

24:53That might be a little bit more

24:54impactful.

24:58>> Chair, just just one followup,

24:59Commissioner McCoy. So, um I get it. I

25:03just I'm trying to understand why you

25:04have a condition that basically says

25:06what code already uh applies, but

25:08perhaps it's the idling piece and I know

25:10you don't have the language in front of

25:11you. So, um there is a component about

25:13truck idling is prohibited. So, is that

25:16perhaps an additional piece while we

25:18have a condition here?

25:19>> Madam clerk, would it be possible to get

25:20that verbiage up on the screen so that

25:23it's clear for Miss Picatti?

25:24>> I can pull it up. I'm sorry. I feel like

25:26I'm gonna pass out too hot. Um,

25:30so I I'd have to look at code, but the

25:33truck idling portion

25:36I believe is in code. Um, but operations

25:41in general are allowed until 11 p.m. by

25:45right. So I I don't know

25:49looking at it. Lauren, maybe you have it

25:51in front of you.

25:52>> Sure.

25:52>> Um, which portions of that are in code

25:54and which portions are not.

25:56So, so again, this this cup please for

25:58the 24h hour we're saying the indoor

26:00component we're okay with, but what

26:02we're trying to limit with this

26:04condition is that outdoor impact. So,

26:06not having trucks go driving around in

26:09the in the middle of the night at 2 3:00

26:11a.m. and their headlights shining into

26:12potential residences and the truck

26:14idling. That that's a a sound that can

26:16be a nuisance for some some folks while

26:18they're sleeping. So, it's it's an

26:20attempt to say we're fine with the

26:2224-hour indoor piece. We want to try and

26:24limit this 24-hour outdoor piece to not

26:26be 24 hours to not be as impactful to

26:28the neighbors.

26:30>> Okay. Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner

26:31McCoy. I I get that. I guess I heard you

26:34just say that this is already code. So,

26:36I'm just trying to understand why we

26:37would need to have it as a condition,

26:39but if if the condition helps, you know,

26:42we we can leave the conversation there.

26:43I'm I'm I'm not trying to to make this a

26:46battle. I'm just trying to understand if

26:48we're putting conditions on that are

26:49already in code, is that just a general

26:51practice or would they be able to

26:53operate 24 hours doing these things

26:55despite code if we approve the CUP?

26:58>> If we approved the CUP without this

26:59particular condition, they'd be able to

27:02do all of the outdoor pieces listed out

27:03there. So, arrivals, departures,

27:05on-site, outdoor movement, they'd be

27:07able to do all of that 24 hours a day.

27:09We're trying to say, please don't do

27:11that. Please only do that between 6:00

27:13a.m. and 10 p.m. and not outside of that

27:15time frame. Perfect. That's all I need.

27:16Thank you.

27:17>> Thanks, Lauren.

27:19>> Yeah. Thank you, Miss Cox. That was the

27:20piece that was missing for me. So, do we

27:23have any other questions from the

27:24commission?

27:26>> Commissioner, was that you or

27:28Commissioner Williams?

27:31>> Hi, Leah. Uh, Commissioner Williams for

27:32the record. Um, I'm going to go back to

27:35Christina and condition six. Uh, shift

27:38change looks like it hits at 11:00,

27:40which puts about 40 vehicles in and out

27:42of shift change. Was the applicant

27:44during the process given the opportunity

27:46to just do the screening um instead of

27:49waiting for it to be and come through a

27:51compliance application? And and the

27:54reason I asked that is because although

27:56I have all the faith in the city, every

27:58rule that we create requires somebody to

28:00enforce that which is labor intensive.

28:03So, I'm just wondering through the

28:04application, was the applicant given the

28:06opportunity to preemptively add this

28:09screening, which would probably block 40

28:12vehicle headlights at 11:00 during shift

28:15change?

28:17>> Good question, Leo Picotti, for the

28:19record. Um, I believe we talked about it

28:21in my review comments, but that, let me

28:27phrase this. So that parking lot is so

28:31far out of compliance that bringing it

28:34into compliance would be fairly

28:38substantial site improvements and and

28:42a significant financial investment in

28:45that. So, while I may have talked about

28:48it, and I know we discussed it with

28:50staff internally as to whether or not we

28:53should try to ask them for that, I think

28:56that ultimately we did not ask them to

28:58do it. But when I wrote the conditions

29:01of approval, um I worked with the

29:04applicant on that condition and so they

29:07do have a full understanding of what

29:09that's going to entail. But again, it's

29:12completely under the purview of this

29:14commission to add that in.

29:16>> Thank you, Miss Picotti.

29:23>> I cannot see online if there's any hand

29:25raised. Uh, madame clerk. Okay. Uh, do

29:30not see anything from Commissioner Visa.

29:32So, do we have any other questions from

29:33the commission?

29:35Seeing none, we will move to

29:36deliberations.

29:41and entertain a motion should one be

29:43made.

29:44>> I'm happy to make a motion unless

29:46anybody else has any more conversation.

29:49Great. In the matter of LDC 270017

29:54based upon compliance with the

29:55applicable findings, I move to approve

29:57the conditional use permit subject to

29:59the conditions listed in the staff

30:00report and I can make all the findings.

30:02>> Commissioner Bera second.

30:04>> We have a motion and a second. All in

30:06favor say I.

30:07>> I. I. I

30:08>> any opposed hearing? None. Motion

30:10carries unanimously. That in concludes

30:12item D1. We will now move on to item D2.

30:18This is a staff report for possible

30:19action. Case number LDC27-000025.

30:25This is 3340

30:27Thornhill ADU rear setback deviation.

30:30For this, we will begin with a

30:32presentation from Mr. Foster.

30:34>> Thank you, Chair. Uh Jeff Foster,

30:36associate planner for the record. Good

30:37evening, planning commission. This item

30:39is LDC 27-25, which is again a uh major

30:43deviation for the ADU or accessory

30:46dwelling unit at 3340 Thornhill Road.

30:49The project site is about 41 acres in

30:52size. Uh located on the west side of

30:55Thornhill Drive, about 455 ft south of

30:58Maragold Way. And this is in the Colin

31:01Ranch area, just to give you a frame of

31:03reference. It's currently developed with

31:05a single family home that was built in

31:061988. And the request before you is a

31:09major deviation to reduce the required

31:11rear yard setback from 30 ft to 15 ft.

31:15As we zoom in, we can see that the

31:17surrounding land uses include single

31:18family residences to the north, east,

31:21and south. Um, and to the west is an

31:23undeveloped parcel owned by Wo County.

31:26Behind and behind that parcel is

31:28McCarron Boulevard. The key issue that

31:31staff analyzed is compatibility with

31:32surrounding land uses.

31:35Master plan single family neighborhood

31:36and on the screen are six goals and

31:38policies, sorry, five goals and policies

31:40from the master plan that are in support

31:42of the proposed request and the zoning

31:44district is single family 3 units per

31:46acre.

31:48So, uh the request itself, uh the

31:50applicant is proposing an approximately

31:53850 square foot accessory dwelling unit

31:55in the rear yard for their aging

31:58parents. and that's in the area uh shown

32:00in the oval there. There is an existing

32:03shed in that location which you'll see

32:04in a picture here in a minute that will

32:06be removed. Access uh to the ADU from

32:10the driveway will be provided via a path

32:12with handrails. The lot coverage with

32:15the proposed ADU is about 14.6% which is

32:18substantially below the 40% threshold

32:20that is allowed. There are no CCNRs per

32:24the applicant. Um, we heard earlier that

32:26there are CCNRs that may apply to this

32:28site. Keep in mind that the city does

32:30not enforce CCNRs. Um, the ADU portion

32:34of code does say that um, ADUs have to

32:36comply with CCNRs, but the city doesn't

32:39maintain a database of CCNRs. We don't

32:42cross check with with uh, HOAs or

32:45anything to see if they have CCNRs um,

32:47that allow or do not allow ADUs. So

32:50that's between the applicant and their

32:53neighborhood effectively um as to

32:55whether or not an ADU is allowed and its

32:58design considerations etc.

33:01Um the proposed location of the uh ADU

33:06um with a 15 ft rear setback minimizes

33:09impacts to the site. I'm going to show

33:11you where the ADU would be if it was if

33:14it met the 30-foot rear setback and

33:16that's in the blue box there. Um but by

33:18moving it 15 feet further to the

33:20property line um that allows the

33:22preservation of two mature trees which

33:24are shown at the green arrows as well as

33:27a reduction in approximately 63 cubic

33:29yards of grading.

33:32In terms of compatibility with

33:33surrounding land uses, the surrounding

33:35parcels are developed with single family

33:37homes. The rear yard areas in on lots

33:41typically function as private open space

33:43and are generally appropriate locations

33:45for ADUs and cassitas. Uh the proposal

33:48does not compromise the health, safety

33:50or welfare of adjacent property owners.

33:53Uh it the most directly affected parcel

33:55to the rear is an undeveloped open space

33:58parcel dedicated to Wash County behind

34:00which is uh South McCarron Boulevard.

34:04Uh this does meet the sideyard setback

34:07um and is no closer to the neighbor to

34:09the south than is allowed by right. Um

34:12and in fact you should have received

34:14yesterday uh letters of support from

34:16both neighbors the neighbor to the north

34:18and the neighbor to the south the most

34:20directly affected neighbors um and

34:23submit they submitted uh letters of

34:24support. Staff is also recommending

34:27condition number five, the standard

34:29allowable days and hours of construction

34:31to minimize potential impacts during

34:33construction. Here are the recommended

34:35findings for a major deviation. Staff

34:37can make all recommended findings. And

34:39here's the recommended motion and I'm

34:41available for questions. The applicant's

34:43representative um I believe tapped out

34:45sick. So uh I'm here by myself. If you

34:49have questions that I can't answer, um,

34:52well, hopefully we can get past those,

34:54but if not, then we would need to, uh,

34:57postpone, uh, ideally to a date certain

34:59to hear the item in the future. But

35:01again, I think it's a pretty

35:02straightforward request, and I'm happy

35:03to answer any questions.

35:05>> Thank you, Mr. Foster. Hearing as though

35:07we will not have an applicant

35:08presentation, we will move to uh,

35:10disclosures from the commission.

35:12Starting on my right, Commissioner

35:13Valto.

35:14>> Uh, Commissioner Valto, I believe I

35:16received an email about this. No other

35:18disclosures.

35:19>> Commissioner McCoy, no disclosures.

35:22>> Commissioner McKenzie, no disclosures.

35:24>> Commissioner Jockman, same.

35:26>> Commissioner Williams, same.

35:27>> Commissioner Delvr, read and received

35:29information and I am familiar with the

35:31site.

35:33>> Uh, Commissioner Bera, same disclosures

35:35as Commissioner Delvr. And I think I

35:37read the letters that u that Jeff Mr.

35:41Foster uh referenced as well.

35:45>> Thank you. We will now move on to public

35:47comment for this item. Madame clerk,

35:49>> we did receive correspondence for this

35:51item that were forwarded to the

35:52commission and entered into the record,

35:53but I do not have any request to speak

35:55forms in person, and we do not have

35:57anyone online with their hand raised.

36:00>> Do we have any request to speak in

36:01chambers at this time? If so, please

36:04raise your hand. Seeing as though we

36:06have none, we will close public comment

36:08and move to questions from the

36:10commission.

36:11Commissioner Devr.

36:13>> Thank you, Commissioner Delvar. Um,

36:15Jeff, just one quick question, and I

36:18couldn't tell from the diagrams or

36:21anything like that, but I believe, and

36:23it's been a little while, so apologies,

36:25that the ADU standards uh talk about the

36:28front door of the attached ADU can't be

36:32the same facing as the

36:35>> um I believe it's on an attached ADU,

36:37Lauren. Um that they have to be uh

36:41visible, they cannot be visible from the

36:43same street.

36:44>> Got it. And this is not attached.

36:45>> Detached ADU.

36:46>> Okay, perfect. Thank you. I just wanted

36:48clarification on that.

36:52>> I got one.

36:53>> Uh, Commissioner Williams.

36:54>> Thank you, sir. Uh, Commissioner

36:55Williams, for the record, Mr. Foster,

36:57>> see some people stole your favorite

36:58color tonight.

37:00>> So, yeah, must hurt. Uh, quickly, so it

37:05appears to me that we can build this

37:06without a major deviation. We're just

37:09talking about a tree, right? One tree,

37:11two trees, and some fill. But the yard

37:14is the yard is an appropriate size to

37:15build with this.

37:17>> Absolutely. There's there's plenty of

37:18space in the backyard. So, um to to

37:22build it without a major deviation. That

37:24is correct.

37:25>> Okay.

37:26>> Um so, yeah, essentially it's to uh

37:29remove it away from those two trees and

37:32to reduce the amount of gradient by

37:33pushing it further to the rear.

37:36>> Okay. Okay. That's all I got for you.

37:38Thanks.

37:42Commissioner McCoy. Um, Mr. Foster, I I

37:45just want to uh thank you for your

37:47efforts. They they have been noticed to

37:50um really help us find that finding

37:53about how it it enhances the project.

37:55So, I I I see it not only this project,

37:57but others. So, thank you for that. Um

38:00and I and I do see the preservation of

38:02trees and the avoidance of grading um as

38:05meeting that that finding. Um the the

38:08question I have and this may be more for

38:09legal tonight, but you mentioned that

38:11the uh CCNRs are not something that that

38:14we enforce. City doesn't enforce. I get

38:16that. If it's a part of the code for

38:19ADUs and that they have to comply with

38:21CCRs, CCNRs, is that something we have

38:24the ability to add on as a condition at

38:27this at this body? Can we condition and

38:29say, "Yep, we approve everything as is,

38:31but you also need to ensure that you're

38:32complying with your CCNRs when you're

38:34doing this." So I would submit that the

38:37ADU section of code already says that.

38:39So in essence, we would be conditioning

38:41code in in in that sense. Um Lauren, do

38:44you have any thoughts on that or or

38:46legal? But

38:47>> I mean, I'll just jump in really

38:48quickly. I I agree with what Mr. Foster

38:50has said here, but I don't know if legal

38:51has additional take on that.

38:57>> Because the city doesn't enforce that,

39:00making it a condition would then require

39:03the city to enforce it. So I don't think

39:05that it's something that would be

39:07appropriate to include as a condition.

39:10>> Okay. So Commissioner McCoy for the

39:12record. So we have it in code, but

39:14there's no enforcibility of that piece.

39:16Is that what I'm hearing?

39:19My understanding is is that

39:22when an applicant presents a building

39:24permit for an ADU, the implicit

39:26assumption is that they have because

39:29that because Title 18 says that ADUs

39:32have to be in compliance with any CCNRs.

39:36The implicit assumption is that they

39:37have already vetted that. And so we

39:40don't there's not a box to check or

39:43making them submit CCNRs or anything

39:45like that. It's just we trust that

39:47they've done it, that they've verified

39:49whether or not that they can do that to

39:51to have that ADU.

39:53>> And yeah, I just want to jump in really

39:54quick again, Lauren Knox, for the

39:55record. So, what the section of code

39:57says is ADU shall not conflict with

39:59private cons private restrictions per

40:011801305. And what that section of code

40:04says is that whether they're more

40:07restrictive than we are, we're not

40:09conflicting with that. us saying yes,

40:11you can have this ADU is not going to

40:15supersede what's in your CCNR. So that's

40:17what that section of code actually says.

40:19So we're not then inherently enforcing

40:21any CCNRs. We're just saying even if we

40:23say yes, if your CCNRs say no, that's

40:25your private agreement and um we don't

40:27supersede that. So that's really what

40:29that section of code intends to do.

40:31>> Commissioner McCoy, for the record,

40:32could you identify that code for me just

40:34one more time?

40:34>> Yeah. So um the section for ADUs is

40:37section 18.03 03.45

40:41A6 and in section A6 it references

40:451801305

40:48which is about conflicting provisions.

40:54>> Okay. And we need to find tonight that

40:59this project is in compliance with title

41:0118. Is that correct?

41:04>> Yes.

41:05And without any information on CCNR's,

41:10whether there is one or isn't one,

41:12um, can we find that this project is in

41:16compliance or that more specifically

41:18that this project is not in conflict

41:20with the CCNR

41:24under that under that section?

41:27>> I think I deferred to legal on on your

41:29take there for the the private

41:30restriction. Well, Jasmine Ma, for the

41:33record, 1801305

41:36subsection C specifically says that the

41:38city is not responsible for monitoring

41:40or enforcing private agreements or

41:42restrictions.

41:44So, yes, I think you can make that

41:46finding.

41:55Okay, Commissioner McCoy, I guess, um,

42:00we're going to make the finding because

42:01we don't have the ability to enforce as

42:03opposed to we can find that it actually

42:06doesn't conflict. So, I guess I'm trying

42:08to just work through that distinction.

42:11We're told right now there isn't a CCNR.

42:14So, you know, that's the evidence in

42:16front of us. I can make that finding

42:18tonight.

42:19>> We're told I'm sorry, what? that there

42:20is no CCNR

42:21>> that there is no CCNR.

42:23>> So I I can make that finding tonight. I

42:25guess this will just be maybe for a

42:26question later for for legal to kind of

42:28help us work through. But if one of the

42:30findings that I have to find is that

42:32this project is in compliance with title

42:3318 and I title 18 says that ADUs cannot

42:36be in conflict with private agreements.

42:39I'm struggling how I'm going to make

42:40that finding if somebody does present a

42:42CCNR that might in fact conflict. Uh I

42:45understand the backend enforcement

42:46piece. I'm just trying to make the

42:47finding tonight that title 18 has been

42:50met and part of title 18 is there's

42:53going to be no conflict privately. So

42:54I'm just expressing that right now. But

42:56given uh the evidence in front of me uh

42:59seems to be that there is no CCNR uh I

43:02will I will uh kind of leave the

43:04conversation there. Thank you.

43:09>> Uh Commissioner Visera.

43:11>> Sure. Uh thank you. I just uh wanted to

43:14build upon Commissioner McCoy's uh line

43:16of questioning there and really I think

43:18it's going to pivot to deliberation as I

43:20don't have any questions but I did just

43:22want to offer some clarification there

43:24that Commissioner McCoy you know um in

43:27that kind of hypothetical

43:28>> I'm sorry I can't hear is there a way to

43:30like

43:31>> can you hear me now Commissioner

43:35>> it's better

43:36>> oh okay uh what I would say is that for

43:40for each of those Commissioner McCoy

43:42in the future, you know, we take them

43:44one at a time, but in such a situation

43:46where there's a CCNR or some other

43:48private agreement, often times like an

43:50applicant might bring forward um a a

43:53letter of support, you know, from their

43:55HOA or or the governing body for those

43:57CCNRs. So, that would be something that

44:00would complement their application more

44:01often than not if it helps you for the

44:03future.

44:10Do we have any other questions from the

44:12commission?

44:14Seeing none, we will move to

44:16deliberation on this item.

44:22Commissioner Williams, I have some. Uh I

44:24often struggle with these setbacks. Um

44:26every single one of them. I think that

44:28this one um when I basically looked at

44:32it quickly, it it was an exception

44:34because there was nobody behind them and

44:36it was common area. I find to have to

44:40repeat that this same situation which to

44:43me appears that there's ample room um

44:46for them to build on their property. um

44:49in the same situation, I would be forced

44:51to then acknowledge that we only did

44:54this or I only did this because there

44:55was nobody behind them um and the next

44:59one might not be. And so it's really

45:01hard for me when you have ample amount

45:04of room to build um an ADU

45:07uh and there's different locations that

45:10you can use. Um I I don't see the value

45:13in a uh one tree or a little less

45:18grading to affect setbacks. So um I

45:22can't make um findings two and three but

45:25be willing to hear if somebody else has

45:28some information.

45:38Uh, Commissioner Berk, for the record,

45:41um, I can make all the findings and I'm

45:42happy to support this one. I appreciate

45:45that the applicant's neighbors provided

45:48some letters of support. Um, I think

45:51that whatever other project comes before

45:54us that's asking for similar ask, we

45:55just review separately as we are asked

45:58to do for all of these projects is

46:00review each one on its merits. And for

46:02this one, I can make the findings.

46:06Uh, Commissioner Jockman, I'll I'll

46:09support those comments from Commissioner

46:11Bisera. I think this is one of, if not

46:14the first ADU request that has come in

46:16to this body since we saw uh the text

46:20amendment and I'm happy to see that we

46:24finally have a request before us. I can

46:26see that that's request is being

46:28triggered by the on-site grading.

46:30Furthermore, if there are any concerns

46:32about the rear setback, uh, Wo County

46:36owns the parcel of interest that would

46:39be in any way remotely applicable to,

46:42uh, this deviation, which, uh, gives me

46:45an added level of comfort. So, I am in

46:48support of this application.

46:58If we have no further deliberation,

47:01we can entertain a motion should one be

47:03made.

47:06>> Commissioner Visera, happy to make a

47:07motion.

47:09>> Please proceed.

47:10>> Great. Thank you. Um, in the matter of

47:13LDC27-000025,

47:16uh, 3340 Thornhill ADU rear setback

47:19deviation. Based upon compliance with

47:21the applicable findings, I move to

47:23approve the major deviation subject to

47:25the conditions listed in the staff

47:26report and I can make the findings.

47:32>> Commissioner Delvari, I second.

47:34>> We have a motion and a second. We do

47:36have expressed uh varying opinions on

47:38this. Madame clerk, would you please

47:40conduct a roll call vote?

47:43>> Sure thing, chair.

47:45>> Commissioner,

47:46>> go ahead.

47:47>> Sorry, I thought you were calling.

47:48>> Okay,

47:49>> please proceed. Commissioner Bisera.

47:51>> Uh, yes.

47:52>> Commissioner DelviR,

47:53>> yes.

47:53>> Chair Jockman,

47:55>> yes.

47:56>> Commissioner Belto,

47:57>> yes.

47:58>> Vice Chair Williams,

47:59>> no.

48:01>> Commissioner McCoy,

48:02>> yes.

48:03>> Commissioner McKenzie,

48:04>> yes. Uh, motion passes 6 to1.

48:07>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. That concludes

48:09item D2. We will now move on to item D3.

48:13And for uh the record, we have received

48:16a request from the applicant

48:17representative to continue this item.

48:20This is on our agenda. We will still

48:22hear public comment on this item. I

48:25believe it would be appropriate to start

48:26with disclosures for this. So, we will

48:30uh start on my right, Commissioner

48:31Velto.

48:33And I did not recite the item that we're

48:36about to talk about. My apologies. This

48:38is a staff report for possible action.

48:40Case number LDC27-000016.

48:45This is Dandini, South Residential.

48:48Back to disclosures. Commissioner Belto.

48:51>> Uh, Commissioner Belto, no disclosures.

48:53>> Commissioner McCoy, no disclosures.

48:54>> Commissioner McKenzie, no disclosures.

48:56>> Commissioner Jockman, same.

48:58>> Commissioner Williams, same.

48:59>> Commissioner Delvr, received and read

49:01materials and I am familiar with the

49:02site.

49:03>> Commissioner Bisera, same as

49:05Commissioner Delvr.

49:07>> That concludes disclosures. So hearing

49:10as though we have a request for

49:12continuence, we will uh now we will

49:15forego the staff presentation and go to

49:18public comment. Madame clerk,

49:20>> we have not received any public comment

49:22for this item in person or online.

49:24>> Do we have any requests to speak in

49:26chambers at this time? If so, please

49:28raise your hand.

49:30Seeing none, we will close public

49:31comments on this item and uh questions,

49:35deliberation, entertain a motion for

49:37continuence should one be made.

49:40>> Oh, sorry. Commissioner Delvr, when is

49:43this being continued to

49:46>> uh they've requested for December 18th

49:47for that date certain?

49:51>> That was December 18th.

49:52>> 16th.

49:53>> 16th.

49:54>> December 16th. Sorry.

49:56>> 16th.

49:58>> December 16th.

50:02At this time, the commission will

50:04entertain a motion should one be made.

50:07>> Commissioner Delvr, sorry.

50:10>> I would like to make a motion to

50:12continue

50:14case number LDC27-000016

50:18Dandini South Residential to a later

50:20date, that being December

50:2416th.

50:25>> Commissioner Williams, second.

50:27Uh we have a motion and a second. Quick

50:30discussion. Legal, are you satisfied? We

50:32typically have the motion in front of

50:33us. Are you satisfied with the way that

50:35motion was made?

50:37Very good. Seeing yes, we uh have a

50:40motion and a second. All in favor say I.

50:42>> I.

50:43>> Any opposed? Hearing none. Motion for

50:46continuence carries unanimously. That

50:48concludes item D3.

50:50>> We will now move on to item D4. This is

50:52a staff report for possible action. This

50:55is a recommendation to city council. So

50:58this is not the our body is not the

51:00final deciding authority on this matter.

51:02We are making a recommendation to city

51:04council. It will advance to city council

51:07regardless of the decision rendered by

51:09this body tonight. Uh because of that

51:12there is no appeal process for the

51:14recommendation provided tonight. This is

51:17case number LDC26-0000103,

51:21Reno's Neon Line District Pedestrian

51:24Walkways. For this item, we will begin

51:27with a presentation from staff. Miss

51:29Picotti.

51:31>> Hello, chair, members of the commission.

51:34For the record, Leah Picotti, associate

51:36planner with City of Reno Development

51:38Services, and this is the second

51:40application I'm presenting tonight for

51:43Reno's Neon Line District pedestrian

51:45walkways.

51:48So, this particular site is located

51:53um

51:54basically on the corner of Rston and

51:57Fourth. It does comprise three different

52:00parcels. The large parcel on your screen

52:02right there is the Jay Resort. And then

52:05there's a smaller parcel to the north

52:07across Fourth Street and another parcel

52:10to the west across Rston. Uh overall,

52:13those are about 9 acres. The request

52:16before you today is a conditional use

52:19permit to allow for two elevated

52:21pedestrian walkways to be constructed um

52:24across Fourth and across Rston.

52:27subject sites are located in the mixed

52:29juice downtown entertainment district

52:31and the mixed juice downtown northwest

52:34quadrant district. Um the northwest

52:37quadrant is in purple and the other one

52:40is there in orange. Uh this site is also

52:43located within the downtown gaming

52:45overlay.

52:46Key issues that staff analyzed were the

52:49skyway design guidelines, pedestrian and

52:53traffic safety, street level experience,

52:56and architectural compatibility.

53:00To give you a little bit of background

53:02on this, this J resort is within Reno's

53:06Neon Line District. Reno's Neon Line was

53:09created under a development agreement in

53:122021.

53:13That development agreement did uh

53:16contemplate a skyway at that time. Um

53:20the current request is for the two

53:22skyways again across West 4th and across

53:26Walston. Rston

53:28uh Reno Municipal Code cites appendix B

53:33which is this document that was created.

53:36It's a 16-page document and it outlines

53:39everything that the city wants to see

53:41when you're going to design a skyway and

53:44propose a skyway. So, this conditional

53:48use permit is different than some of the

53:50other conditional use permits that come

53:52before you. So, the review process for

53:54this is that first it has to go to the

53:57Skyway design committee. the that

54:00committee is tasked with looking at that

54:03appendix B that 16page document and

54:06going through it piece by piece by piece

54:09and saying does this proposal meet

54:12what's our standards are and is there

54:15any way that it can be improved so that

54:19skyway design committee was held on

54:21October 1st um the they did provide

54:24comments and those are in your packet uh

54:28Then it goes to the planning commission

54:31here tonight and in two weeks this will

54:33go before the city council. So tonight

54:35the planning commission is making a

54:37recommendation to city council regarding

54:40these two proposed skyways.

54:44So on the top of your screen there the

54:46photo on the top you can see the parcel

54:48that the J resort is on outlined in

54:51orange. So, the first skyway that we're

54:54talking about here is,

54:58sorry, I've forgotten how to use this,

55:00is uh right there across Fourth Street.

55:03And the plan is that that will connect

55:06to a future pool, spa, and fitness

55:08center for the Jay Resort that are going

55:10to be um developed over on that side of

55:13the property. So this skyway really acts

55:17more as a pedestrian walkway to get

55:20people from one from J from one section

55:23of J Resort to the other section of J

55:25Resort. And if the pool is over there,

55:27then you know it's going to be people in

55:29robes and bathing suits and things like

55:31that where they don't necessarily want

55:32to walk outside and cross fourth street,

55:34especially in the dark. The second

55:38Sorry,

55:41not working. Um the second skyway is

55:44across Rston and they are proposing to

55:47put a future maybe fourstory parking

55:50garage on that property. So again this

55:53is a functional component of the J

55:56Resort that is located off premises and

55:59this walkway will allow guests and the

56:01public to go back and forth using that

56:04skyway rather than crossing Rston in the

56:06dark.

56:08So, um, both are going to be enclosed

56:12climate controlled glazed walkways with

56:1524-hour public access. The photo on the

56:17bottom there is a rendering, and I like

56:20this one because you can see the future

56:22developments that these skyways are

56:24going to be connected to. So, on the

56:26bottom right hand side of the screen,

56:27you can see that future parking garage

56:30and on the bottom right left hand side

56:34of the screen, you can see that future

56:35pool there.

56:39Regarding design and dimensional

56:41standards, I know when we say the word

56:43skyways, people picture what's over on

56:45Sierra Street where it's the entire

56:47block that is covered and made into this

56:50tunnel where you're going to have to

56:51hold your breath and cross your fingers

56:52when you drive underneath it because it

56:54really does create a tunnel in downtown.

56:57That's not what this is. This is a 15

57:00foot wide pedestrian walkway with glass

57:03down the side of it to get people from

57:06one area to another. There isn't going

57:09to be a Walgreens located inside of that

57:11walkway. There's not going to be

57:13amenities located in that walkway. It is

57:15literally just a walkway to get people

57:17from one section to the other section

57:20safely. Um, regarding the size, 15t

57:24wide. The whole skyway is about 20 feet

57:26tall. It's located just shy of 30 feet

57:29off of the ground. And where the actual

57:32walkway is, where you're putting your

57:33feet is going to be about 36 feet above

57:36the street level.

57:38So again, they have extensive glazing to

57:41reduce that tunnel effect. Um they're

57:43using EFS, which is my understanding is

57:45this really lightweight um insulation,

57:48aluminum framing, accent bands, and

57:50programmable LED architectural lighting.

57:54Here's some renderings for you and I'll

57:57talk about these kind of one at a time.

57:59We'll start with the single one on the

58:01left here. So, this one is if you were

58:05down on third or commercial by the train

58:08tracks and you were sort of looking uh

58:10north toward J Resort, you can see that

58:13proposed parking garage on the left hand

58:15side of the screen and north of that you

58:18can see that proposed pool and fitness

58:20center. This kind of gives you an idea

58:22of the impact that those skyways are

58:25going to have on that area. So again,

58:27it's not covering the entire block. This

58:30is just a a walkway from one side to the

58:33other. Kind of like what the Atlantis

58:35has over to the convention center.

58:37Something similar to that. On the right

58:39hand side of your screen on the top,

58:42this is on the corner of Rston and

58:44Fourth Street, looking straight down

58:47Fourth Street. Right there you can kind

58:48of see where the pool features are going

58:50to be over on the lefthand side. Parking

58:52garage would be over on the right.

58:54Again, I really like this rendering

58:56because it does show the transparency of

58:58those. Um it's not just a a solid block

59:02running through the sky there. It it is

59:05architecturally interesting and similar

59:08to what is already in the J Resort while

59:11maintaining all of those standards

59:12outlined in appendix B. And then again

59:15down on the bottom right hand side of

59:16the screen, you can see this is the one

59:18on Rstone connecting over to the

59:20parkway. Again, it's not impeding any

59:23views or anything like that. It's just a

59:26walkway above the road.

59:30So, I'm sure everybody knows, but we

59:32received um quite a bit of opposition on

59:35this project. And the opposition that

59:38was raised is similar to the concerns

59:40that were raised by the Skyway

59:42committee. So I kind of put that into

59:45some groups and I want to talk about

59:47each one of those things. So the primary

59:50concerns were that street level

59:52activation that the skyways may divert

59:55pedestrians from sidewalks and

59:57discourage activity at streetf facing

1:00:00businesses.

1:00:01We have the public versus private

1:00:03benefit. There were concerns that these

1:00:05connections primarily serve Jesort

1:00:07patrons rather than the broader public.

1:00:11There was the timing of the future

1:00:13development. There were questions about

1:00:15approving skyways before these parking

1:00:17structures and recreational amenities

1:00:19are constructed. Um pedestrian safety

1:00:23and necessity. Uh existing crosswalks

1:00:25and street improvements may already

1:00:27provide adequate pedestrian access.

1:00:30Visual and historical character. Uh

1:00:33potential streetscape impacts. There's a

1:00:35lot of concerns about the proposed uh

1:00:39signage type thing that says Reno on the

1:00:43one um skyway. And then we of course

1:00:46have master plan consistency and a lot

1:00:48of commenters contended that the

1:00:49proposal conflicts with policies

1:00:51supporting walkability, mixeduse

1:00:53development, downtown revitalization and

1:00:55pedestrian oriented streets. So I want

1:00:56to talk about some of that now.

1:01:00So this first primary concern is this

1:01:03street level activation that skyways are

1:01:05going to divert pedestrians from

1:01:06sidewalks and discourage activity at

1:01:09streetf facing businesses. So, the photo

1:01:11you can see there is um looking down

1:01:14Fourth Street, coming from downtown,

1:01:16looking down Fourth Street at the Jay

1:01:18Resort. And what you're looking at here

1:01:20is um a lot of the street art and the

1:01:23improvements that have been made to this

1:01:26area um mostly by the Jay Resort uh to

1:01:30improve and build upon this neon line

1:01:32district which um everybody, you know,

1:01:36is very concerned about the walkability

1:01:38of this area. As we know, a lot of those

1:01:40existing older businesses have been

1:01:43demolished. There is a lot of vacant

1:01:45lots here that have been turned into

1:01:47parking spaces and things like that.

1:01:49However, as part of that agreement, um

1:01:52they have done every single thing that

1:01:55they were required to do to activate

1:01:58this area for pedestrians. So, Fourth

1:02:01Street is an urban corridor. So, this is

1:02:04one of our master plan policies specific

1:02:06to urban corridors.

1:02:08And it says, "Divine design buildings

1:02:10with an emphasis on creating a safe and

1:02:12inviting pedestrian environment. This

1:02:15can be accomplished by providing a high

1:02:17level of architectural detail at street

1:02:19levels such as canopies, awnings, and

1:02:21street trees to provide shade, planting,

1:02:24window boxes, and public art for visual

1:02:27interest, and transparent windows and

1:02:30door openings to provide eyes on the

1:02:31street and encourage street level

1:02:33activity. place a particular emphasis

1:02:36along corridor frontages at transit

1:02:38stations and other locations expected to

1:02:41have a significant pedestrian activity.

1:02:44So that's exactly what the Neon Line

1:02:46District has done. So in this first

1:02:49picture you can see some of that street

1:02:50art, some of those trees that have been

1:02:52planted, some of the landscaping that's

1:02:54been installed, the walls that have been

1:02:55installed, the fencing that's been

1:02:56installed. Here's another photo of some

1:02:59of that area that's been activated. We

1:03:01have street lights. We have landscaped

1:03:04parkways. We have more art. We have

1:03:06music playing on the streets. Here's

1:03:08some more. You can see some more artwork

1:03:10placed on the streets. You can see those

1:03:11landscaped parkways. You can see the

1:03:13shade trees that have been planted.

1:03:16Here's more. You can see the wayfinding

1:03:18sign that has been put there directing

1:03:20people to downtown to the Truckucky

1:03:22River. Here you can see the front of

1:03:24Glow Plaza and what has been done there.

1:03:27We have this new pedestrian crossing

1:03:29that goes right across that way. Again,

1:03:32we have lots of artwork. We have lots of

1:03:34things to look at. We have safe

1:03:35sidewalks. We have street trees. We have

1:03:38shade. We have lighting. We have

1:03:40everything that they've asked for here.

1:03:42And if nobody's seen it yet, if you

1:03:44drive down Fourth Street, Jay Resort has

1:03:46a new entrance. Um they have added more

1:03:49artwork. They've added more landscaping.

1:03:51And they've really opened this area up

1:03:54and made this more inviting environment

1:03:56in general. So, regarding this um this

1:04:00piece of the public opposition, this

1:04:02place is being activated. Um the city is

1:04:06working on it, the Jay Resort is working

1:04:09on it. Um but it takes time and there's

1:04:12piece by piece by piece that this needs

1:04:15to be put together. And I think that

1:04:17they're doing a great job. Um it looks

1:04:20much better than it did back 10 years

1:04:22ago. So, in terms of activating this for

1:04:25pedestrians, creating safe environments,

1:04:27providing shade, putting in street

1:04:28trees, it's done.

1:04:31Uh, second concern here, public versus

1:04:33private benefit concerns that the

1:04:36connections primarily serve the J resort

1:04:38patrons rather than the broader public.

1:04:40Well, here's a couple of master plan

1:04:43policies. This is 3.3B, tourism, arts,

1:04:46and entertainment. continue to support

1:04:48casinos as a core component of the

1:04:50city's tourism industry and the downtown

1:04:52entertainment district while seeking to

1:04:54broaden the range of tourism, arts, and

1:04:56entertainment oriented uses that appeal

1:04:59to more diverse demographic. Well, we've

1:05:02had the Glow Plaza, we have the festival

1:05:04grounds, we have the soccer fields that

1:05:06have all been put in. So, while this

1:05:09connection is to the J Resort, we do

1:05:11have master plan policies that ask us to

1:05:14support our casinos. Um, and while we're

1:05:17supporting them, they are creating more

1:05:21a broader range of tourism and they are

1:05:23creating entertainment oriented uses

1:05:25that appeal to a more diverse

1:05:27demographic.

1:05:283.1C tourism and entertainment.

1:05:31Encourage reinvestment in established

1:05:33casinos and the introduction of new uses

1:05:36and activities that strengthen

1:05:37downtown's appeal as a tourism and

1:05:40entertainment destination. strive to

1:05:42make downtown the location of choice

1:05:44within the region for annual events,

1:05:46cultural celebrations, and other

1:05:47community gatherings. I don't know how

1:05:49many of you have been to events over at

1:05:52this site, but I think I would have

1:05:54never even gone to this part of town uh

1:05:56back 10 years ago, and now, you know, I

1:05:59I don't mind taking my son down there,

1:06:01walking around, we look at the artwork.

1:06:04So I think that they have invited that

1:06:06and I think that they are doing

1:06:08entertainment uses.

1:06:10Um

1:06:12more uh we've got parking uh master plan

1:06:163.4B improve the function and

1:06:18utilization of existing parking

1:06:20facilities in downtown and the overall

1:06:22user experience associated with those

1:06:24facilities. Evaluate future public

1:06:27parking needs based on location cost,

1:06:29current use, and demand. Well, back a

1:06:31couple of years ago when we did the cup

1:06:33for the festival ground, we had 10

1:06:35parking lots that were designated for

1:06:38parking in this area. So, if you're

1:06:41coming in from out of town and you're

1:06:43staying downtown and you're going over

1:06:45to go see something at the festival and

1:06:47you're parking over at the J Resort,

1:06:49these skyways act not only not only in

1:06:52the interest of the J Resort, but also

1:06:55for the things that are going on in the

1:06:57Neon Line District.

1:07:00pedestrian realm. Design streets and

1:07:01other public spaces with the comfort and

1:07:03enjoyment of pedestrians in mind.

1:07:06Enhance streetscapes through the

1:07:07incorporation of generous walkways,

1:07:09prominent building entries, transparent

1:07:11storefronts, outdoor dining, seating,

1:07:13street trees, awnings, decorative

1:07:14lighting, public art, bike racks, and

1:07:16other distinctive urban design elements.

1:07:18You guys saw in all the pictures, we've

1:07:19already done this on this street. But I

1:07:21think that what these skyways are doing

1:07:23is they are adding uh a another level of

1:07:27safety to what has already been an

1:07:30activated area. So now if you don't want

1:07:33to go outside and walk across Rston to

1:07:36get to your car, you can take that

1:07:38skyway and you can walk right over there

1:07:40and you don't have to put on a parka to

1:07:42get over to your car.

1:07:45Uh timing of future development.

1:07:46questions about approving skyways before

1:07:48the parking structure and recreational

1:07:50amenities. So, there's two conditions of

1:07:52approval that are included in here that

1:07:54kind of protect um what is going on

1:07:57there. So, number one, the project has

1:07:59to comply with everything that they

1:08:01submitted. So, they can't tell us that

1:08:03it's going to be one thing and then make

1:08:05it something else. Um that is in code

1:08:08very clear. This is the standard number

1:08:11one condition of approval on every

1:08:13project. Additionally, we have condition

1:08:15six, which is prior to issuance of a

1:08:17building permit for either pedestrian

1:08:19walkway, a building per for either

1:08:21pedestrian walkway, a building permit

1:08:23shall be issued for the building or

1:08:25development to which the walkway will

1:08:28connect. Construction of each pedestrian

1:08:30walkway shall occur in conjunction with

1:08:32the development it is intended to serve

1:08:34and the pedestrian walkway shall not

1:08:36receive a final inspection until a

1:08:38functional connection to an associated

1:08:40building or development has been

1:08:42established. The applicant has indicated

1:08:44that they're going to put amenities on

1:08:46the one side and a parking structure on

1:08:48the other. Um neither of those things

1:08:51are going to be required uh for any kind

1:08:53of additional land use entitlements.

1:08:55They can go directly to building permit

1:08:57for that. So, it does make sense that

1:08:59they would want to come here and get

1:09:00their entitlement for the skyways before

1:09:02they start the designing and apply for

1:09:04the building permits for what they're

1:09:05going to lead to.

1:09:08Um, let's see. Another problem, visual

1:09:12and historic character, potential

1:09:14streetscape in streetscape impacts,

1:09:16including concerns about the proposed

1:09:19replica Reno Arch. So,

1:09:23we have lots of historic signage in the

1:09:25Neon Line District. I mean, there are

1:09:29nine replica historic signs, well, eight

1:09:33historic replica signs. One is actually

1:09:35an original sign and not a replica all

1:09:38along the frontage here. So, if you're

1:09:40driving down Fourth Street, you are

1:09:42already looking at all of these historic

1:09:45signs that are here. So,

1:09:49putting this other sign,

1:09:54decorative feature, whatever you want to

1:09:56call it, um, on this archway is really

1:09:58consistent with the theme of the neon

1:10:01line district. So, again, Globe Plaza

1:10:04has incorporated replicas of the

1:10:06historic neon lines to celebrate the

1:10:08city's heritage. Eight of the nine signs

1:10:10were installed in 2020 are

1:10:12reproductions. Um, and the proposed Reno

1:10:16Arch inspired skyway continues the

1:10:18district's established historic signage

1:10:20theme.

1:10:22The conditional use permit uh

1:10:24recommended findings are on the board.

1:10:26Um, there's a few different things and

1:10:28I'll just go through it. Location

1:10:29complies with Reno Municipal Code and

1:10:32the purpose of the zoning district. Yes.

1:10:34Um, it does comply with Reno Municipal

1:10:37Code. I didn't tell you earlier, but

1:10:39there is a portion of code that says,

1:10:41"Hey, we'll allow skyways in the city of

1:10:44Reno, but only in very, very specific

1:10:47areas. We have a little map. They're

1:10:49allowed on this road. They're allowed on

1:10:51that road, and they're allowed on this

1:10:52road. These are

1:10:55basically one of the few locations where

1:10:57we would even entertain looking at a

1:11:00skyway. So, we we have that component.

1:11:04We have said yes, we will allow Skyways

1:11:07in these locations. The applicant has

1:11:10complied with all of the Reno Municipal

1:11:12Code standards. They've complied with

1:11:14all of our appendix B and the 16 pages

1:11:16of standards there. They've met and

1:11:18exceeded all of the codes. So, yes, it

1:11:20complies with Reno Municipal Code. It

1:11:22complies with the location. It complies

1:11:24with the purpose of the zoning district.

1:11:26It complies with the Skyway design

1:11:27guidelines. Is it compatible and

1:11:29consistent with surrounding development?

1:11:32Yes, there's an existing resort there.

1:11:34This is within the neon line district.

1:11:37This is complimentary architecture. This

1:11:40is just a functional component of an

1:11:43existing casino resort. Public services

1:11:46and utilities are available. Yes, we

1:11:48have existing infrastructure,

1:11:49engineering, and fire have both reviewed

1:11:51this. Are the characteristics compatible

1:11:54with the types of surrounding

1:11:55developments? Yes, we have other skyways

1:11:58that are more impactful right down the

1:11:59street. Um, we have this offers another

1:12:03pedestrian connection. It's meeting the

1:12:05transparency standards. It's

1:12:07architecturally compatible. Is it not

1:12:10materially detrimental to the public

1:12:12health safety and welfare?

1:12:15It's a grade separated crossing. So, it

1:12:19enhances safety. It's meeting all of the

1:12:21required clearance and all of the safety

1:12:23standards.

1:12:26Now for skyways we have four specific

1:12:30findings for skyways. So it has to be

1:12:33consistent with the skyway design

1:12:34guidelines and minimize that tunnel

1:12:36effect. Yes, it's transparent. It's not

1:12:40very wide. It has the required clearance

1:12:44and its architectural design is

1:12:46compatible with the surrounding

1:12:47development and doesn't create that

1:12:50tunnel effect. Does it impair scenic

1:12:53resources? No. Um, we looked at this.

1:12:56So, these are scenic resources on our

1:13:00registry. We have to we have to say this

1:13:03is something that the city has

1:13:05identified as a scenic resource and

1:13:08there are no scenic resources that are

1:13:10going to be impaired by this. We've

1:13:11looked up, down, all around. No scenic

1:13:13resources that are going to be impaired.

1:13:15Consistent with orderly development. Um,

1:13:18yeah, it supports the planned resort

1:13:20expansion and the connectivity. Is there

1:13:23no negative impact on street level

1:13:25pedestrians and 75% of the frontage has

1:13:28to have consent? Um the required

1:13:30property owner consent has been

1:13:32obtained. Um all of the sidewalks are

1:13:35being maintained. All of our shade

1:13:37trees, all of our artwork, all of the

1:13:40pedestrian amenities that have already

1:13:42been installed down there are not going

1:13:44to be changed. All this is doing is

1:13:47providing an elevated walkway from one

1:13:50section of the resort to another section

1:13:52of the resort.

1:13:54Um so my my motion is on the board, but

1:13:58what this doesn't include is that um

1:14:01condition number two uh restricts the

1:14:04time for obtaining a building permit to

1:14:0618 months and the applicant has

1:14:09requested that that be extended to 36

1:14:11months and he's going to talk about that

1:14:13in his presentation. Um, but I wanted to

1:14:16put that up on the board for you guys,

1:14:18let you know that that is coming and

1:14:20that staff does support that

1:14:22modification to condition number two

1:14:24from 18 to 36 foots. With that, my

1:14:28presentation is complete. I am available

1:14:30for questions and the applicant also has

1:14:32a presentation. Thank you.

1:14:35>> Uh, please state your name for the

1:14:36record. You will have 15 minutes.

1:14:38>> Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members

1:14:40of the commission, for the record,

1:14:41Garrett Gordon tonight representing

1:14:43Jacob's Entertainment.

1:14:45Leah did a great job. Um, I will have a

1:14:48presentation as well, but I will try not

1:14:49to be redundant and just hit some

1:14:50additional points that she uh did not

1:14:53cover. But as you heard, the request

1:14:55tonight is for two uh pedestrian

1:14:57walkways uh connecting the J Resort to

1:14:59other amenities in downtown. Um Leah

1:15:02showed this

1:15:04slide um along with this picture and you

1:15:06can see uh one pedestrian walkway over

1:15:09Rston, a second one over Fourth Street.

1:15:12Um the soon to be built parking garage

1:15:15on the west side on the west side of

1:15:16Rston. Uh this will connect to as well

1:15:19as uh proposed uh fitness center, pool,

1:15:22spa on the north side of Fourth Street.

1:15:24A question has come up a few times of

1:15:27why do this now? Why do this when

1:15:30there's nothing to connect to yet? Why

1:15:32do this when there's more work to be

1:15:34done on designing these two locations?

1:15:36That's exactly why we have to do it now.

1:15:38Uh I've been before this body dozens and

1:15:41dozens of times and you always entitle

1:15:44your project before you go out and start

1:15:47designing it and building it. You can't

1:15:48get financing if you don't have the

1:15:50entitlement. You can't have the

1:15:52architects going to final plans if you

1:15:54don't have the entitlements. For

1:15:55example, the parking garage. Obviously,

1:15:57you would design the third or four

1:15:59fourth floor differently whether or not

1:16:01a skyway connected to it or a skyway

1:16:04didn't connected to it. It would have

1:16:05different load factors. It would have

1:16:06different entrance points. It might have

1:16:08different elevators. So, it's critical

1:16:11to secure these entitlements hopefully

1:16:13tonight and eventually at city council.

1:16:15So, then we can roll up our sleeves and

1:16:17move forward with the final design and

1:16:19construction. The 36 months is important

1:16:22because we're not talking about just one

1:16:24building permit tonight, which is

1:16:26typical for that 18month requirement.

1:16:29We're actually talking about three

1:16:30building permits, if not four. We need a

1:16:32building permit for each of the

1:16:34walkways. We also would need as

1:16:36conditioned a building permit for what

1:16:38goes on the other side of the street.

1:16:40So, we need a building permit for the

1:16:41parking garage and also a building

1:16:43permit for what goes north of Four

1:16:44Street. So, with three or four building

1:16:46permits, 18 months is just unreasonable.

1:16:49So, we're requesting 36 months uh

1:16:51tonight.

1:16:53Another rendering Lee did a good job of

1:16:54explaining and showing this proposal.

1:16:57And let me tie into a couple things. U

1:16:59we obviously had to go through the d the

1:17:01downtown design review committee. I want

1:17:03to thank Commissioner McCoy for serving

1:17:04on that committee. I thought uh

1:17:05hopefully you agree with me. It was very

1:17:07productive. Um we learned a lot from you

1:17:09and your colleagues on that commission

1:17:10and certainly made some tweaks. For

1:17:12example, you can see the columns that

1:17:15are below uh two of those pedestrian

1:17:18walkways. We call them kind of Y-shaped.

1:17:21We presented to the downtown design

1:17:23review committee um kind of two options.

1:17:25One the Y, another one a more kind of

1:17:27larger rectangle feature. And the

1:17:29committee gave us feedback and said,

1:17:30"Yeah, that larger uh more rectangular

1:17:34um idea or concept was just not as

1:17:36visually pleasing as a smaller column.

1:17:38you saw less column uh and also wouldn't

1:17:41take up as much footprint um on the

1:17:44sidewalk or on um some of the other

1:17:47streetscape areas so we could obviously

1:17:49preserve all the trees and streetscape

1:17:51um amenities we've put in and also we

1:17:53can enhance those. So appreciate your

1:17:55feedback on that. We did decide to move

1:17:56forward uh with those Y columns. Uh Lee

1:18:00did a great job identifying where these

1:18:02are located. Lee also did a great job of

1:18:05touching on the master plan policy. So,

1:18:07a finding tonight is does this comply

1:18:09with the master plan? I think I could

1:18:11stand up for stand up here for hours and

1:18:14talk about every single master plan

1:18:16policy this complies with, including a

1:18:19component of your master plan is the

1:18:21downtown action plan. And the downtown

1:18:23action plan also has many policies and

1:18:27uh policies and programs that this

1:18:29checks all those boxes as well. For

1:18:31example, pedestrian safety. This will

1:18:33eliminate a need for new crossings, but

1:18:36instead provide a walkway that removes

1:18:38that vehicle pedestrian conflict and

1:18:41will provide a safe and weatherprotected

1:18:43route for Reno residents, for visitors

1:18:45of the Jay, for folks staying at the Jay

1:18:47Resort. It is pedestrian safety, which

1:18:50is critical. And I'm also say critical

1:18:52is, you know, we have built uh

1:18:55significant improvements downtown,

1:18:57including the festival grounds. If any

1:19:00of you have went to a concert there, got

1:19:02out at 10, 11 o'clock at night, it is

1:19:05busy. There is a lot of people running

1:19:07across Rston to get to their parking to

1:19:09get to their car, running down the

1:19:11street to go catch an Uber, running down

1:19:13the street to go catch a lift. It is in

1:19:15fact uh needs a more cohesive pedestrian

1:19:18safety route to a parking garage. Also

1:19:21those soccer fields, many new families

1:19:24we have coming downtown, both local and

1:19:27from over the hill to use these soccer

1:19:28fields. What is soccer? What are soccer

1:19:30fields used by? Children, families, all

1:19:34ages. Having them have a nice safe

1:19:36pedestrian route over a busy fourth

1:19:38street, over a busy rston certainly

1:19:40checks that box for pedestrian safety as

1:19:43well. Downtown development, growth of

1:19:45downtown. Leah hit on this and

1:19:47particularly uh gaming properties. This

1:19:50absolutely supports the J resorts

1:19:52expansion, generates construction jobs,

1:19:54permanent hospitality jobs, increased

1:19:56downtown traffic, and of course tax

1:19:58revenue for the entire Wo County uh and

1:20:00Ward One community. Tourism and

1:20:02entertainment that was hit on by Leah.

1:20:04Uh really exciting to have those soccer

1:20:06fields down there. Uh there's currently

1:20:07four. We're in talks to continue adding

1:20:10more. It's been such a success. Um it

1:20:12certainly bring in some new folks

1:20:13downtown who maybe have not been

1:20:15downtown in years uh with their family

1:20:16for their kids to play on those fields

1:20:19as well as um some additional teams. I'm

1:20:22a soccer dad. I got two daughters. I've

1:20:24spent a lot of time going over that

1:20:26hill. Um I like those teams and those

1:20:28dollars to come here and adding to this

1:20:31resort, adding to pedestrian friendly um

1:20:34amenities uh will do that. and

1:20:36accessibility uh and inclusion is in

1:20:39fact the the finding and the the policy

1:20:41in the master plan. This absolutely will

1:20:43provide ADA compliant weatherprotected

1:20:45connectivity for all of our users

1:20:47including those with mobility challenges

1:20:49ensuring inclusive access across the

1:20:52resort. So Leah touched on this kind of

1:20:55a unique process for a use permit.

1:20:57You're all used to hearing a use permit,

1:20:59approving a use permit and it's done

1:21:01absent an appeal. This required a two

1:21:04additional steps. So I went to the NAB,

1:21:06of course, in August, but I went to this

1:21:08Skyway design review committee and there

1:21:10were five members. Uh your uh

1:21:12Commissioner McCoy was one of them.

1:21:14Also, we had two architects on there, uh

1:21:16Mr. Maybust and Mr. Hudson. Also, Mike

1:21:19Vanhton from your RAB board was on there

1:21:22and provided some very um critical input

1:21:24as well as Bill Thomas. I'm sure you

1:21:26know that name, uh RTC director, and he

1:21:28is a planner by trade. So he brought a

1:21:31really good perspective of planning, but

1:21:33also some of you who have traversed

1:21:36Keystone and Forest Street lately can

1:21:38see all that construction. RTC is making

1:21:40a significant investment in that

1:21:43corridor all the way from downtown to

1:21:45Mayberry, which included those new

1:21:48lights that you see in the uh in the uh

1:21:51in the district. Um those lights were in

1:21:53fact approved in the development

1:21:56agreement. The concept was for those of

1:21:58you who have been to San Diego for

1:22:00example, you know when you walk into the

1:22:01gas lamp district that you're walking

1:22:03into a district there's different

1:22:05lights, there's different streetscape.

1:22:06You feel a different vibe. Bill Thomas

1:22:08made a great point of those lights have

1:22:10now been built and constructed by RTC.

1:22:13And you'll see in a little later slide

1:22:14he suggested let's make sure those

1:22:16lights that can change color are also

1:22:18programmed with the skyway to change

1:22:20color as well. So it's all cohesive and

1:22:23can change colors for St. Patrick's Day.

1:22:25everything could be green or for

1:22:26Halloween it could be orange. So really

1:22:28tying into that district and these

1:22:30public improvements. Uh there were also

1:22:33comments related to transparency and

1:22:35structural design. Um we did make uh

1:22:38significant tweaks to the to the

1:22:40pedestrian walkways as a result of the

1:22:42uh comments. So I want to thank again m

1:22:44commissioner McCoy for those fire and

1:22:46life safety signage compatibility

1:22:48pedestrian experience lighting and

1:22:49operations. Um, we took the feedback and

1:22:52made some tweaks and I'll talk a little

1:22:54bit about that tonight. I do want to

1:22:56though point to um this right side of my

1:22:58slide. This is directly from those

1:23:01design guidelines that are required to

1:23:03be in compliance. And you heard from

1:23:05Leah. We complied with every single one

1:23:07of them. And I do have our architect on

1:23:09Zoom tonight. So, there's any specific

1:23:11architectural questions, he can answer

1:23:13them. But look at this. It's so unique.

1:23:15It's not just a use permit findings, but

1:23:17what are we looking at for Skyways? You

1:23:19can see purpose and intent. It says

1:23:22skyways provide an opportunity to

1:23:24increase the economic viability of a

1:23:27project. You don't hear that every day

1:23:29for any use permits. Um this is pretty

1:23:32unique and it's been contemplated by the

1:23:34city that these do provide this economic

1:23:37viability of a project to a city. And

1:23:39further it says, "The short block

1:23:41lengths that exist in downtown Reno make

1:23:44it difficult to provide largecale

1:23:46projects to strengthen Reno's economy."

1:23:49I mean, I could not have said it better

1:23:51myself. We can't continue to grow this

1:23:53resort, continue to grow this district

1:23:55on one piece of land. I mean, we have

1:23:58short blocks, small blocks. We're

1:23:59surrounded by a grid system. We have

1:24:01contemplated abandoning some of these

1:24:04roads, but in working with the fire

1:24:05department, your planning staff, those

1:24:07roads need to stay open. So, what better

1:24:08way to connect downtown with these short

1:24:11blocks than have these very fine-tuned

1:24:14specific pedestrian walkways. And

1:24:15finally, I'd add, again, this is from

1:24:17your language from the city. In

1:24:19addition, properly designed skyways may

1:24:22provide for improved traffic flow

1:24:24absolutely here with festival grounds,

1:24:26glow plaza, soccer fields, increased

1:24:29pedestrian safety, absolutely. And

1:24:32increased pedestrian comfort. I think

1:24:34Leo mentioned, you know, the proposed uh

1:24:37spa and pool on the north side.

1:24:39Pedestrian comfort. You're carrying your

1:24:41your towel and your flip-flops. Now you

1:24:43got to walk outside and go across the

1:24:44street and go back in the Jay. I mean,

1:24:46the comfort of pedestrians who could be

1:24:47locals, who could be out of stators. Um,

1:24:50we want to provide that comfort for

1:24:51them. So, um, I'd also add the soccer

1:24:54families coming over here, giving them

1:24:56comfort with their strollers and their

1:24:57kids, making sure they feel comfortable

1:24:59not having to cross um, some busy

1:25:01intersections in downtown. So it's it's

1:25:04we absolutely comply with that purpose

1:25:06and intent uh of Skyways.

1:25:09Leah did a great job touching on uh

1:25:11these these findings consistent with the

1:25:13master plan. There are dozens and dozens

1:25:15of master plan policies this complies

1:25:17with. Leah confirmed and of course uh

1:25:19your legal council looks at every

1:25:21application uh and every staff report

1:25:23and they concluded that yeah this does

1:25:25comply with the development code. Uh

1:25:27mitigates traffic impacts. Absolutely.

1:25:29It removes that pedestrian traffic

1:25:31conflict that can exist with all this

1:25:33new pedestrian activity downtown.

1:25:35Provides a safe environment. And then

1:25:37rational phasing plan. We would just

1:25:39asked to change that from 18 months to

1:25:4136 months. And here just to emphasize

1:25:45it, a couple more master plan policies.

1:25:47Uh multimotal connections. Uh arts and

1:25:50outdoor recreation tourism. Yes. Tourism

1:25:52and entertainment. Pedestrian network.

1:25:54Yes. Pedestrian connectivity.

1:25:56Streetscape character. We comply. Uh the

1:25:59walkways mitigate traffic impacts by

1:26:01reducing and and decreasing those

1:26:03conflicts and absolutely creates a safe

1:26:05uh environment downtown. This is also

1:26:08important. Um believe you didn't mention

1:26:10it, but in your existing Reno code,

1:26:14there is a map that shows where skyways

1:26:16are allowed and where they're not. So

1:26:19the city of Reno has already

1:26:21[clears throat] made a decision of where

1:26:22these should go downtown, where they

1:26:24shouldn't. Just for the record, this

1:26:26absolutely this location absolutely is

1:26:29on a block that is allowed and not

1:26:32prohibited. So I would submit to you

1:26:34number one council or at some point

1:26:37approved this development code and said

1:26:39these should be downtown for the

1:26:41economic viability of downtown and to

1:26:43help with large scale projects given the

1:26:45smaller blocks but two make sure it

1:26:48complies with the design guidelines and

1:26:50in fact it does. some more findings. Uh

1:26:54I won't belabor Lee did a great job.

1:26:56Just a couple other renderings I think

1:26:57are important. So this is looking on

1:26:59Fourth Street toward downtown. You can

1:27:02see um those lights on the left and

1:27:04right hand side. They're currently blue.

1:27:05They can change colors. We're going to

1:27:07take um Mr. Thomas's direction and make

1:27:10sure it ties to the color of the walkway

1:27:13and the um replica sign to make sure

1:27:16it's all congruous as you move forward

1:27:18with different colors. Let me just touch

1:27:20base on what I think is a pretty unique

1:27:22and incredible biggest little city um

1:27:27tribute sign. How cool is that that as

1:27:29you come in the city of Reno, you now

1:27:30see another biggest little city sign.

1:27:33Just for the record, there is no intent

1:27:35to replace the downtown one, which is

1:27:38the staple of downtown, with this one.

1:27:41We're not trying to move people or

1:27:43businesses or pedestrians away from

1:27:45downtown. We're adding just an

1:27:47additional layer of interest of a selfie

1:27:52location of uh a commitment in our

1:27:56development agreement to stick with the

1:27:57theme of Reno's neon line district to

1:28:01have a great sign which we have other

1:28:03signs at uh Glow Plaza replica signs

1:28:06continuing with that theme and it's not

1:28:08cheap but we in fact want to build it

1:28:10intend to build it and make sure it ties

1:28:12this whole area together and I can

1:28:14assure you as legal legal counsel. We do

1:28:16have the legal right to use those words

1:28:18and put it on this uh this walkway.

1:28:24I touched base on the findings. I know I

1:28:25have about a minute left, so I won't

1:28:26belver the point, but certainly all CU

1:28:28findings can be made. I just want to as

1:28:30I take my last minute here is just point

1:28:32and I hope um Mr. McCoy can appreciate

1:28:34this. There was also a discussion at one

1:28:36point of let's make these as narrow as

1:28:39possible to limit eliminate the

1:28:41footprint. So the one on the left for

1:28:43Walston Street, there was at one point

1:28:45it was going to be I think about 30 feet

1:28:48to move people from the parking garage

1:28:49to the Jay, but at the direction of of

1:28:53the committee uh we were in fact able to

1:28:55shrink that even further to about 20 ft.

1:28:58And two, you can see that darker area of

1:29:00where people walk, the underbelly, I

1:29:02guess it's called architectural term,

1:29:04the underbelly of of the area that holds

1:29:07the load of the pedestrians. If Mr.

1:29:10McCoy recalls there was a comment by one

1:29:12of the architects saying, "Hey, that's

1:29:14pretty wide. That's pretty long. You

1:29:16know what? It doesn't have to be that

1:29:18long to hold the way to pedestrian." So,

1:29:19you can see we've shrunk that. So, the

1:29:22So, now instead of I think it was about

1:29:24a 30 foot tall structure, we're now down

1:29:27to 17. So, again, the design review

1:29:29committee provided some great input with

1:29:32that. Um, I'll end with here's just the

1:29:35site plan. You can see a visual of

1:29:36moving uh folks north and moving f folks

1:29:40uh west

1:29:42and you've seen these pictures and right

1:29:45on time Mr. Chairman I will uh conclude

1:29:48my presentation and happy to answer any

1:29:49questions and our architect is on Zoom

1:29:51and he's as well happy to answer any

1:29:53questions. Thank you.

1:29:54>> Thank you. I think you said he would

1:29:56take less than 15 minutes but that's

1:29:58okay. Uh disclosures. Commissioner

1:30:00Valto. Uh, Commissioner Alto received

1:30:02and reviewed emails

1:30:04uh and spoke to the applicant's

1:30:06representatives.

1:30:08>> Commissioner McCoy, I want to disclose

1:30:10that I served on the Skyway design

1:30:11review committee as uh discussed

1:30:13earlier. Um, we considered this proposal

1:30:15on October 1. I discussed my

1:30:18participation with the city attorney who

1:30:20advised it does not create a conflict

1:30:21and the disclosure is appropriate.

1:30:23Therefore, I agree um and intend to

1:30:26participate in the discussion and vote

1:30:27tonight.

1:30:29Commissioner McKenzie, I did have

1:30:31conversations with the applicant and I

1:30:33read all of the public comments as well.

1:30:36>> Uh, Commissioner Jockman met with the

1:30:38applicant representative.

1:30:40>> Commissioner Williams, same.

1:30:42>> Commissioner Delvr, I am familiar with

1:30:45the site. I read and received all the

1:30:47information including public comments

1:30:49and I met with the representative as

1:30:51well.

1:30:53Commissioner Bera met with the

1:30:55applicant's representative on site, read

1:30:57and reviewed the material provided, read

1:30:58and reviewed public comments, including

1:31:00those on the barber brief. I'm familiar

1:31:03with the site and I was part of the last

1:31:04cup that came before us relating to the

1:31:06J Resort just for historical context.

1:31:10>> That concludes disclosures. We will now

1:31:12move to public comment. Madame clerk,

1:31:14>> thank you, chair. We did receive

1:31:15correspondence that were forwarded to

1:31:17the commission and entered into the

1:31:18record. I also have two public comment

1:31:20cards in person and we have a few folks

1:31:22online. So I'm going to start in person

1:31:24and then go online. We'll start with Joy

1:31:27Orlick followed by Josh Heert and then

1:31:29we'll move online to Maya Johnson and

1:31:31Alicia Barber. So Joy,

1:31:38thank you. Um my name is Joy Orlitch and

1:31:41I am the president of Historic Reno

1:31:43Preservation Society. We have about 700

1:31:46members and our mission is to educate

1:31:48and advocate for the preservation of

1:31:50historic resources in our community. So

1:31:53I'm reflecting um discussions we had at

1:31:56our most recent board meeting as all as

1:31:58well as um other conversations and

1:32:01things from our members. Um,

1:32:04and we we have some concerns and in fact

1:32:07you might think that my comments I would

1:32:09have seen the slide presented by your

1:32:11city planner with the the summary of of

1:32:13the concerns. Um, but I assure you we

1:32:16had not seen that. But um, first

1:32:18observation, both Skywalks go directly

1:32:21from the Jay Resort to empty lots with

1:32:23no accompanying proposal for any

1:32:25developments on those parcels. And we

1:32:27know they have plans and ideas. The

1:32:30Atlantis had plans and ideas. couple

1:32:33decades ago and we haven't seen those

1:32:35built. So, there's some skepticism

1:32:37there. Um, I think the Leah made a a

1:32:41great case for all the improvements that

1:32:43have made to the pedestrian access on

1:32:45Fourth Street, which to me suggests that

1:32:48these skywalks um are unnecessary and to

1:32:53us it looks like a solution in search of

1:32:55a problem. Um, even if there's a a need

1:32:59for more pedestrian access, you note

1:33:02that the Jay Resort side of of these

1:33:05skywalks only go to the property.

1:33:07There's no street side access on both

1:33:10sides, which I think is is interesting

1:33:12if we're really trying to facilitate uh

1:33:14pedestrian traffic. Um, as you might

1:33:17assume or or might imagine, um, we have

1:33:20some concerns with the appropriation of

1:33:23the Reno Arch replica. um the 1964 Reno

1:33:28Arch that that no longer exists here and

1:33:31we're curious as to why that particular

1:33:33design was used um because it was a city

1:33:37structure and and so it's not owned by

1:33:41uh [snorts] any private entity um to

1:33:43have ownership rights. We feel like it's

1:33:45a misrepresentation of a structure that

1:33:47no longer exists. Um maybe with an

1:33:50intent to validate um uh a fabricated

1:33:54entryway into downtown Reno and to

1:33:56justify and amplify the value of the

1:33:59many empty parcels that are there. And

1:34:01that the um Skyway proposal appears to

1:34:04be uh [snorts] maybe a poorly

1:34:06camouflaged attempt to provide

1:34:08structural support for the mockup um

1:34:10arch. And so, um, last comment, I just

1:34:15have to say that I haven't been to a

1:34:17public meeting like this in a few years,

1:34:19and I was pretty astonished to hear the

1:34:20city planner go beyond representing um

1:34:24compliance issues with codes and and um

1:34:29ordinances to effectively justify and

1:34:32advocate for a uh a private project. And

1:34:36lastly, the original city arch turns 100

1:34:39on the 23rd. I'm going to leave some

1:34:41postcards. Come down to the celebration

1:34:43in front of the auto museum. Thank you.

1:34:47>> Next up is Josh Heert followed by Maya

1:34:50Johnson and Alicia Barber online.

1:34:57>> Hi Josh Abear for the record. Uh I'm a

1:34:59member of the Reno Sparks NAACP and

1:35:01Strongtowns which is a national urbanist

1:35:04organization. Uh commissioners, thank

1:35:06you for your attention today. I hope

1:35:07you've had the opportunity to read my

1:35:09written comments. In opposition to the

1:35:10conditional use permit for Jacob's

1:35:12Entertainment's proposed skyways. They

1:35:14are firmly grounded in Reno's municipal

1:35:16code and master plan. I aim to bolster

1:35:18them here. Reimagine Reno. Our master

1:35:22plan is our democratic blueprint for the

1:35:24Reno that we want to be and hope to

1:35:26build. Its thoughtful principles are

1:35:28meant to guide the city's decisions. You

1:35:32are its agents and guardians. without

1:35:34you upholding its principles and putting

1:35:36them into practice. That vision of Reno

1:35:38is just pretty words on paper. I know

1:35:40your volunteers and that being a

1:35:42planning commissioner is a serious

1:35:44commitment of time and energy. I can't

1:35:46imagine anyone doing that who doesn't

1:35:48want what's best for Reno. So, I'm not

1:35:50questioning anybody's motives here. My

1:35:52only goal is to inspire you to choose

1:35:54our master plan over Jeff Jacobs because

1:35:57make no mistake, that is the choice

1:35:59here. There is no world in which Skyway

1:36:02is specifically designed to benefit the

1:36:05J Resort align with our master plan. It

1:36:08doesn't matter that they're open to the

1:36:09public. No one but the resort's patrons

1:36:11will use them because they only connect

1:36:14resort properties. People don't go that

1:36:16far out of their way just across the

1:36:18street. So any claims that these skyways

1:36:21increase connectivity, access, and

1:36:23safety for the public in the way meant

1:36:25by the master plan are not just

1:36:27laughable, they're dishonest.

1:36:30Skyways, especially ones designed for

1:36:32private gain, are terrible for life at

1:36:35street level. This is a wellestablished

1:36:37fact. The row is just one data point.

1:36:41They segregate resort patrons from

1:36:43downtown. That reduces street activity,

1:36:45which is the opposite of the master

1:36:47plan's goal. You know what you didn't

1:36:48see in those pictures? People.

1:36:52But that's not all. Skyways make the

1:36:53streets below more dangerous because

1:36:55they say to drivers, "The road's all

1:36:57yours." They put the public at risk for

1:36:59the comfort and convenience of resort

1:37:01patrons. These skyways are the camel's

1:37:03nose under the tent for the expansion of

1:37:05the J Resort's footprint. If we approve

1:37:07them, they will form the spine of the J

1:37:09Resort exclusive economic zone. An urban

1:37:12dead zone where all life and activity

1:37:15occurs behind walls, doors, fences, and

1:37:18gates. Where no patrons need to walk

1:37:21down the street because they can stroll

1:37:23in covered comfort from one property to

1:37:25another. and where no one else wants to

1:37:28walk down the street because there is

1:37:30literally nothing there for them. That

1:37:32artwork is not bringing people downtown.

1:37:35That's the m the that's the master plan

1:37:38for downtown turned on its head. In

1:37:41order to be eligible for a conditional

1:37:42use permit, a project must either

1:37:44conform to the master plan or provide

1:37:47some public benefit that justifies not

1:37:50conforming to it. These skyways fail

1:37:52badly on both counts. I implore you to

1:37:55uphold our master plan and reject this

1:37:58conditional use permit.

1:38:02>> All right. Next up is Maya Johnson

1:38:04online followed by Alicia Barber. Maya,

1:38:07when you're ready, just unmute your mic,

1:38:08state your name for the record. You'll

1:38:10have three minutes.

1:38:11>> Good evening. Can you hear me?

1:38:13>> Yes. Go ahead.

1:38:14>> May Johnson for the record. Uh I also

1:38:16have some comments in writing. Uh they

1:38:18there was a bit of a technical delay,

1:38:19but they should have come in today, so I

1:38:20hope you've had a chance to review them

1:38:22as well. I would like to start out by

1:38:25reminding the commission that the

1:38:27application for these walkways

1:38:29specifically states that they aim to

1:38:32mitigate traffic impacts by reducing

1:38:33pedestrian activity at the street level,

1:38:35thereby decreasing conflicts with

1:38:36vehicular circulation and improving

1:38:38traffic flow. That's a quote from the

1:38:40application

1:38:42that's completely antithetical to

1:38:44everything our master plan is supposed

1:38:45to be about. Uh, from the presentations

1:38:48I've heard, I think there's some

1:38:49confusion or perhaps a willful misuse of

1:38:51the term activation. Uh, I also spend a

1:38:55lot of time in that area for boring

1:38:56everyday purposes like going to the

1:38:57doctor or getting lunch. And it's

1:38:59miserable. Uh, it's empty. There's

1:39:02barely anybody around. Uh, there are a

1:39:05few businesses there like, uh, one of my

1:39:07favorites, 101 Taiwanese. Great great

1:39:09restaurant, but everything around is

1:39:11empty. Parking lots, sculptures, forget,

1:39:14>> nothing. Uh there isn't even a place to

1:39:16lock up my scooter when I go there. Um

1:39:20so

1:39:22putting up some statues and having some

1:39:24concerts and soccer games on the weekend

1:39:26is not activation. Activation is

1:39:28everyday urban activity. I want to be

1:39:30clear about that. So this exhortation

1:39:33that everything is active because

1:39:34there's some art is not

1:39:37it it's either uh intentionally

1:39:39misleading or just completely

1:39:40inaccurate. Um, we've heard some

1:39:43examples of supposed benefits like if

1:39:46you don't want to walk across Rston

1:39:49Street to get to your car, you don't

1:39:50have to. Or, uh, how busy it is at night

1:39:54after an event lets out because all of

1:39:56these people are trying to cross the

1:39:58street to get to their cars or catch an

1:39:59Uber or catch a lift. Everything I'm

1:40:01hearing is about cars, making it easy

1:40:02for people to get between their car and

1:40:04the resort or an event space without

1:40:06having to deal with the street. That's

1:40:09not a city. That's a suburban isolated

1:40:11complex. This is supposed to be a city

1:40:13and the master plan is supposed to be

1:40:15about making us a a multiuse dense city

1:40:19where people walk, not a place where

1:40:21people drive into a parking garage and

1:40:23then they're inside of a complex where

1:40:25they don't ever have to interact with

1:40:26the street again. Um,

1:40:29not I heard some comments in the

1:40:31presentation about people not wanting to

1:40:33go outside because it's dark. It's

1:40:35downtown. Why is it dark? It's not

1:40:36supposed to be dark.

1:40:38um comments about short small blocks

1:40:41being a problem to solve. That's what

1:40:42cities are supposed to look like. There

1:40:44are supposed to be lots of small

1:40:46commercial spaces with lots of different

1:40:48things happening in them, not one

1:40:50gigantic complex. So, I I I think

1:40:53there's a a misunderstanding of what a

1:40:54city environment is supposed to be like,

1:40:56that they see uh the size of the blocks

1:40:59as a problem that needs to be overcome.

1:41:02Um,

1:41:04we're talking about streets being

1:41:05uncomfortable for somebody with a

1:41:07stroller. Well, why would that be?

1:41:09There's something wrong with our streets

1:41:10if it's uncomfortable to walk on them

1:41:11with a stroller. Um, this whole thing

1:41:15where we're trying to

1:41:18uh run the downtown economy or or uh

1:41:22kind of bootstrap an active neighborhood

1:41:24with with these big event spaces and

1:41:27>> Thank you, Maya. You're out of time.

1:41:28>> Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't hear the the uh

1:41:30>> No worries. Thank you.

1:41:32>> Okay,

1:41:33>> next up is Alicia Barber.

1:41:38>> Good evening. Can you hear me?

1:41:39>> Yes, we can. Go ahead.

1:41:40>> Great. I'm Dr. Alicia Barber,

1:41:42professional historian, preservation

1:41:43planner, and author. Separately from

1:41:45this specific item, I've sent you some

1:41:47concerns about your development review

1:41:48process. Uh, per code, as I pointed out,

1:41:51you're supposed to consider the

1:41:53applicant submitted application and be

1:41:55presented with your staff's objective

1:41:57analysis. And I do very very respective

1:42:00respectfully want to ask you if you

1:42:03think that is what you just received

1:42:05tonight. There are multiple levels of

1:42:07consideration required here. There's of

1:42:09course the question of whether you can

1:42:10meet the required findings when you

1:42:11aren't able to evaluate exactly what

1:42:13will be built on the other side of these

1:42:15skyways and therefore whether the

1:42:16skyways are essential to the project

1:42:18much less beneficial to the city.

1:42:20There's a question of whether a skyway

1:42:22can feature signage that dominates its

1:42:24facade as this design does. And then

1:42:25there's the question of whether that

1:42:27signage could or should feature the

1:42:28design of a historic structure and

1:42:30specifically the 1964 Reno Arch. Here I

1:42:32just want to focus on the question of

1:42:33the historic arch imagery. In historic

1:42:36preservation, the preservation of

1:42:38historic structures, the reproduction of

1:42:41historic structures in contemporary

1:42:42development is discouraged because it

1:42:44blurs the line between authentic

1:42:46structures constructed in a prior era

1:42:48and reproductions built at a much later

1:42:50time. Blurring that line sews confusion

1:42:53over what is actually historic and

1:42:55contributes to the devaluation of

1:42:56authentically historic structures by

1:42:59suggesting that they can simply be

1:43:00reproduced in the present day. And

1:43:01that's true for J Resort's other

1:43:03signage, too. By the way, the difference

1:43:05is that they didn't need the city's

1:43:06permission for those and they are not

1:43:08city endorsed. Careful reproductions of

1:43:11historic structures can be useful in

1:43:12very specific circumstances when there's

1:43:14absolutely no chance that a viewer will

1:43:16confuse the reproduction with the

1:43:17original, as at a museum or a partially

1:43:20reconstructed historic site. When

1:43:22Disneyland or a Las Vegas resort

1:43:23features a prominent reproduction of the

1:43:25Eiffel Tower or the Statue of Liberty,

1:43:27no reasonable viewer would confuse those

1:43:28structures with the real thing.

1:43:30Likewise, the use of an image of one of

1:43:32the Reno Arches in a local company logo

1:43:34or even on-site signage does not risk

1:43:36confusion with the original. That is not

1:43:38the case when the design of a historic

1:43:39Reno arch is incorporated into a

1:43:41physical structure of the same

1:43:42approximate size of the original arch

1:43:44and installed over a street in downtown

1:43:46Reno. Because in an outdoor urban

1:43:48environment, people take what they see

1:43:50at face value. If a structure looks

1:43:52historic, they'll assume it is historic.

1:43:54Most visitors or residents might not

1:43:55know the original 1964 Reno Arch was not

1:43:58historically located on West for Street,

1:43:59but on Virginia Street. or if they did

1:44:01remember it to be on Virginia, they

1:44:03might find themselves questioning

1:44:04whether that was actually the case or

1:44:05whether the original had been physically

1:44:07relocated to West Fourth Street in order

1:44:08to preserve it. That confusion is

1:44:10precisely what's meant by blurring the

1:44:12authentic with the fake. The 1964 Reno

1:44:15Arch only ever stood as an arch, not a

1:44:17skyway, in its historic location on

1:44:19Virginia Street and was later

1:44:20dismantled, altered, and moved to

1:44:21Willlets, California when a modern

1:44:23replacement was desired. The authentic

1:44:26history, fabrication, design, and

1:44:27ultimate disposition of this 1964 arch

1:44:30is central to Reno's story, and it's our

1:44:32responsibility to keep that story clear

1:44:33and intact. Upholding a broader respect

1:44:36for authenticity is essential to that

1:44:37effort. The proper direction would be

1:44:39for Jacob's Entertainment, if this is

1:44:41approved, to generate its own original

1:44:42designs for any signage that it erects,

1:44:45rather than appropriating imagery from

1:44:46historic civic structures, even if

1:44:48intended as tribute. Thank you.

1:44:51>> Thank you. Uh, one last comment in

1:44:53person from Brie Casper.

1:45:00>> Hello, chair and members of the planning

1:45:02commission. My name is Elizabeth Brie

1:45:04Casper. I am third generation to live in

1:45:07Nevada and proud of it. Um, my family

1:45:11moved to Keystone when there was still a

1:45:13dirt road for Keystone. If that gives

1:45:14you any frame of reference for how long

1:45:17I've lived in the neighborhood of the

1:45:18Pounding District. Um, I appreciate

1:45:22proper development when it's done well

1:45:26and I think that the J Resort and the

1:45:28Neon Line needs to be evaluated for what

1:45:31it's asking. Um, we've already given a

1:45:34lot of our downtown region to this

1:45:36development and we need to look at our

1:45:40previous ordinances. We had an ordinance

1:45:42about no more billboards in the state or

1:45:44city limits. And then we had an

1:45:46ordinance about the skyways. And I don't

1:45:50think it's too much to ask for a

1:45:52development to take heed to what our

1:45:54current ordinances have been in place

1:45:56and not constantly threaten or question

1:46:00or jeopardize or make us re-evaluate

1:46:02these things that have been established

1:46:04by our citizens, by our board members,

1:46:07by our committees that have been here

1:46:09for a long time. I want to speak to the

1:46:12legal burden of proof that rests

1:46:14entirely on the Jacob's Entertainment to

1:46:17prove an absolute operational necessity.

1:46:20So, let's talk about an operational

1:46:22necessity. What does that look like? Is

1:46:24that something that means that it's

1:46:26going to increase its revenue? Is that

1:46:28something that means it needs to be used

1:46:30daily for it to be an operational

1:46:32necessity? for it to be something that

1:46:35is above they have failed to meet that

1:46:38burden is what we're trying to point out

1:46:40is that I don't feel and I feel like the

1:46:42community that's here to speak about

1:46:43this today um doesn't feel that this has

1:46:47been met this burden of operational

1:46:50necessity furthermore I'd like to design

1:46:52um the design I also have a problem with

1:46:55of the replica of the 1964 Reno arch to

1:46:58the corporate skybridge um I think it

1:47:01also directly

1:47:03uh violates the fundamental historic

1:47:06preservation principles. I live in a h a

1:47:08house that's over a hundred years old. I

1:47:10take the fact that I'm part of the

1:47:12historical preservational society

1:47:14seriously. I try and keep a lot of my

1:47:17exterior of my home to the date of when

1:47:20it was made so that it's not being

1:47:23completely revamped to a way that

1:47:25doesn't align with the neighborhood. And

1:47:28now a block and a half away, we have the

1:47:31neon light district going in. And so I

1:47:33just like to think of a little bit of

1:47:34courtesy for the people in the cemetery

1:47:38that now are going to have a neon

1:47:40lights. I mean, my grandma's buried up

1:47:42there. You know, I'd like us to just

1:47:44have some big picture thoughts about

1:47:47what we're saying yes to today. So,

1:47:49thank you so much for your time.

1:47:53With that, I do not have any additional

1:47:55public comment registered for this item.

1:47:58>> Do we have any request to speak in

1:47:59chambers at this time? If so, please

1:48:01raise your hand.

1:48:03>> Seeing none, we will now close public

1:48:05comment and move to questions from the

1:48:08commission.

1:48:12Who would like to start?

1:48:15>> We'll go for it.

1:48:17>> Uh, Commissioner Wr.

1:48:18>> Commissioner Wr. I have questions for um

1:48:22Leah, for you and for Garrett, but I'll

1:48:24start with you, Leah. Um and then I'll

1:48:26also yield at some point, too, because I

1:48:28have quite a few questions.

1:48:31So, I I think my biggest and I'm not

1:48:34going to get into discussions just yet,

1:48:35but it goes to some of the questions

1:48:37that I have. I just feel like there's a

1:48:38lot of contradiction in what was

1:48:41presented, right? Like we're trying to

1:48:43make it safe for the public, but the

1:48:45public really can't isn't really going

1:48:47to be able to use it. but we have really

1:48:49safe streets and we have all this art

1:48:50that we want people to see, but we're

1:48:52gonna put these skyways in. And there's

1:48:53a lot of a lot of just again too much

1:48:55contradiction for me at the moment. Um,

1:48:58but some of the questions I have in

1:49:00particular are um a lot of like the

1:49:03safety of these skyways themselves. So

1:49:08whether it's for the public or for

1:49:10patrons, whatever, um is re who actually

1:49:14is going to be monitoring the safety

1:49:18because we you talked about safety a lot

1:49:20with these um Reno police involved with

1:49:24with this. Is it Jay Resort that's going

1:49:27to be responsible? Um and then I just

1:49:30also have questions in general about the

1:49:32accessibility

1:49:34um of this. Like is it 247 for the

1:49:36public? Is it? Again, I'm just not sort

1:49:39of seeing and understanding a lot of

1:49:41this.

1:49:42>> Thank you. Um, Commissioner Delviard.

1:49:44Levotti for the record. So, first off,

1:49:48safety. I think when we're talking about

1:49:49safety, we're talking about the safety

1:49:51of pedestrians crossing the street. Um,

1:49:56when this is two different kinds of

1:49:58things. So, people who are out on the

1:50:00street looking at artwork are not the

1:50:03same people who are trying to get across

1:50:06the street to get in their car and go

1:50:08home. They're not the same people who

1:50:10are trying to get their kids across the

1:50:12street to go to the pool. You know,

1:50:14that's that's a different kind of person

1:50:16um doing different things. So, I think

1:50:19what we're talking about is the safety

1:50:20of people being able to cross the road

1:50:22when they're trying to get to the J

1:50:24Resorts facilities, including the

1:50:26parking garage and the fitness center.

1:50:28Um the second part of what you were

1:50:31asking joged my memory.

1:50:34>> Um

1:50:38>> oh yes um they are going to be open

1:50:42>> sorry um the

1:50:45going to be open 24 hours. Um they will

1:50:48be monitored by the J Resort security um

1:50:52because it is private property. Uh our

1:50:54understanding based on the application

1:50:56is that it's going to be open to the

1:50:58public and um again it'll be open to the

1:51:02public 24 hours.

1:51:04Actual security within the skyway or on

1:51:07the private property would be under uh J

1:51:10Resort. Anything outside in the public

1:51:12right of way would be RPD

1:51:14>> and that there's nothing there's no

1:51:16condition for that though. So at any

1:51:18point in time, Jay Resort could say, you

1:51:21know, it's just for our patrons.

1:51:30For the record, Garrett Gordon,

1:51:31Commissioner, thank you for the

1:51:32question. It's good to see you. Um, let

1:51:33me hit that second point first. So,

1:51:35there's two conditions in here that deal

1:51:37with the the safety of the walkways.

1:51:40Condition number nine requires security

1:51:42cameras be continuously maintained,

1:51:44monitored, and secured by the property

1:51:46owner. So that's a requirement. And then

1:51:49condition number eight, the applicant

1:51:51shall coordinate with the Reno Police

1:51:53Department regarding crime prevention

1:51:55through interv environmental design

1:51:57measures. Applicable measures identified

1:51:59through the review shall be incorporated

1:52:01into the final plans. So while we will

1:52:03be required to monitor them and have

1:52:05cameras, we'll also need to get with

1:52:06your police department and make sure um

1:52:08we implement those environmental design

1:52:11measures at their request. So answer

1:52:14your question on the police part. Um on

1:52:18your other question regarding the um the

1:52:21use of them. Yeah. I mean absolutely the

1:52:23intent is to have them open 24 hours a

1:52:25day 365 days a year. And it's not just

1:52:28from getting in your car on Rston and

1:52:31going in to eat dinner at J Paul's

1:52:33right. There's three soccer fields on

1:52:36the west side of Rston today. So folks

1:52:40needing to cross over and over to get to

1:52:44the games is a big deal, right? A lot of

1:52:47those um a lot of those tournaments are

1:52:50stay and play, right? And so we only

1:52:52have 700 rooms. So a lot of those

1:52:53families had and their teams, right,

1:52:56stay at the Jay need a good way to cross

1:52:58over rston and get down to their fields,

1:53:00not just to their cars, but to other

1:53:02elements of the um of the district.

1:53:05Secondly, we have considerable um teams

1:53:08coming in with families who need rooms

1:53:10at other locations downtown, right? And

1:53:12so they're staying at the row, they're

1:53:13staying at Whitney Peak. That's also a

1:53:15good way to move people over who aren't

1:53:17even staying at our resort, but getting

1:53:19them over to our entertainment

1:53:20facilities or recreational facilities as

1:53:22well. So, the intent is keep it open,

1:53:25open to the public, open to people

1:53:27staying at the Jay, open to people using

1:53:28and families using the fields. And then

1:53:31even at the um festival grounds, right,

1:53:33which is on the other side of Rston,

1:53:35folks using that back and forth um as

1:53:37well. I'm sure I know folks go to the um

1:53:41they go to the festival grounds and get

1:53:44out late and are hungry and what's down

1:53:46the street? Gold and silver, right? So I

1:53:47can cross over and come down and and

1:53:49walk rather than fighting at crosswalks

1:53:52or things of that nature. So it's going

1:53:54to be open used by all kinds of people

1:53:56and we're really excited about adding

1:53:58this component to the area. Great.

1:54:03>> Why is this not staying on? Okay. I have

1:54:05one more question and then I will yield.

1:54:07Uh and it is it is for you. Um and you

1:54:10and I talked about this earlier. Um I'm

1:54:14it seems like the the approval of the

1:54:18skywalks before the approval permit for

1:54:22the garage or the spa or whatever may or

1:54:24may not be going in there. It just seems

1:54:26premature to me. And then you're going

1:54:30back and saying we need 36 months

1:54:32because of all these other things that

1:54:34we need to put in place. So I'm So help

1:54:36me understand the process maybe a little

1:54:39better to understand why this is coming

1:54:42before that and why you know 36 versus

1:54:4418 months because I'm not understanding

1:54:47it.

1:54:48>> Sure. For the record, Garrett Gordon. So

1:54:49great great question. I'm glad we talked

1:54:50a little earlier about it and I can

1:54:51expand. So,

1:54:54anytime I'm before this body and there's

1:54:56a there's a buyer or a seller or some

1:54:58entitlement, right? You're always

1:54:59getting the entitlement before you buy

1:55:01the land. You're getting the entitlement

1:55:03before you go out for construction

1:55:04financing. You're getting the

1:55:05entitlement before you spend big bucks

1:55:08with an architect to do final design and

1:55:10final construction drawings because the

1:55:12the term is right, there can be no

1:55:14additional discretionary approvals when

1:55:16you start funding those big bucks to go

1:55:18design stuff. So this is obviously

1:55:20discretionary approval because I have to

1:55:22come before you and city council. So we

1:55:24need that certainty that hopefully these

1:55:27two walkways are approved. If that is

1:55:30the case then the next step is hiring

1:55:33those architects um additional

1:55:35architects to really fine-tune not only

1:55:38these conceptual drawings of walkways

1:55:40but to fine-tune of what they would look

1:55:42like and be engineered for loads etc.

1:55:44But then my point earlier was we also

1:55:47have to go through the permitting

1:55:48process of what's across the street. You

1:55:51obviously are going to design a parking

1:55:53garage or a structure differently if a

1:55:56skyway is connecting to it or if it's

1:55:58not. Right? If it's not, you have

1:56:00different circulation, you have

1:56:02different loads, you have different

1:56:03engineering standards. But with a

1:56:04skyway, obviously connecting to the

1:56:06third floor is a different design. So we

1:56:09need the certainty to know rather than

1:56:11spending money to go okay let's design

1:56:12it with and then let's design it without

1:56:14go get financing for it and then come

1:56:17it's just a lot of waste of money rather

1:56:19than coming here getting certainty of a

1:56:21is it approved and b what will it look

1:56:23like because we have to design it in

1:56:25compliance with what you see tonight I

1:56:27can't show up to the building department

1:56:29have something completely different but

1:56:30that certainty of what it will look like

1:56:32and that's approved now we can go pull

1:56:35go design and pull permits on the

1:56:37parking garage and then on the other

1:56:38side of fourth is also a separate

1:56:40construction plans and permitting

1:56:42process for that. So we need the 36

1:56:44months to get all that done. I mean I've

1:56:48worked on one building permit for like a

1:56:50access point and that's taken 12 months.

1:56:53This we just need the additional time to

1:56:55get this to get this done. So I hope

1:56:57that answers your question.

1:57:00>> Uh Commissioner Velto, you had your hand

1:57:02at one point.

1:57:03>> Yeah. Thank you. Uh Garrett, I have some

1:57:05questions about the specific skyway

1:57:07findings.

1:57:08>> Yes, sir.

1:57:08>> Uh finding number one asked if the

1:57:11skyway design is consistent uh with uh

1:57:14the general guidelines and lessens the

1:57:16tunnel effect. Why is the design uh

1:57:19that's being proposed? Why does that

1:57:21lessen the tunnel effect?

1:57:24>> Because there is no tunnel effect for

1:57:26this walkway, right? The tunnel effect

1:57:28would be uh the design guidelines use a

1:57:32couple different terms. They use skyway

1:57:34which is this like a ped pedestrian

1:57:36walkway but it also uses the term like

1:57:38sky building. So I would submit to you

1:57:40the connection for the row that covers a

1:57:44whole block right that's a sky building

1:57:47and I think you would need to have an

1:57:49objective conversation about the tunnel

1:57:51effect and the darkness of that whole

1:57:54block if you cover it. There's also a

1:57:57midblock Skyway uh Calva right like and

1:58:01Harris again that's midblock very wide I

1:58:05think they even had gaming up there at

1:58:06some point one could say we've all

1:58:08driven it was on um center street now

1:58:10it's University way it kind of gets dark

1:58:12when you go through there and you look

1:58:14through and it's kind of looks like a

1:58:15tunnel here I would submit to you given

1:58:17the glass it's translucent it's as

1:58:20narrow as possible I don't think anyone

1:58:21with a straight face can say it creates

1:58:23a tunnel probably I'd argue the same

1:58:25thing for the Atlantis. No one can argue

1:58:28that that creates the tunnel. So, it's

1:58:30just in the design and I would say how

1:58:31much of the block you're taking up. And

1:58:33I would I feel pretty strongly from a

1:58:35legal standpoint there's no tunnel

1:58:37effect problem here.

1:58:39>> And then I have a follow-up question if

1:58:41that's okay. On the discussion about the

1:58:44the Reno Arch sign, um so like one way

1:58:48to look at this is that it's taking

1:58:50something historical. Another way to

1:58:52look at it is it's more of like an

1:58:54homage and something that we want to

1:58:56have in our city. Kind of I know you

1:58:59talked about other areas like the Gas

1:59:01Lamp District, how you know when you're

1:59:03in that district. Is there anything else

1:59:05coming from Keystone that really

1:59:07signifies you're in downtown or coming

1:59:09from the west side of the city?

1:59:12>> Uh for the record, no, not to my

1:59:14knowledge. And let's remember too that

1:59:16there's also an a current other archway

1:59:18right in front of the Renaissance, the

1:59:19even older arch, right? that wasn't

1:59:21mentioned in the public comment that

1:59:22we're now somehow replacing one arch,

1:59:25but there already is another one as you

1:59:26come into downtown by the Renaissance.

1:59:28Then you have the one downtown that's

1:59:29Virginia Street. And let me just be

1:59:31clear, we're not trying to confuse the

1:59:33public with adding a, you know, I'll use

1:59:37the technical term cool, a pretty cool,

1:59:39you know, uh, replica, uh, that's

1:59:41designed in a way that's neon, that's

1:59:43retro, that matches everything we're

1:59:45doing. I don't think there was LED

1:59:47lights in 1965. I don't think anyone can

1:59:50argue we're trying to look like 1965

1:59:53with LED lights. Like we're just trying

1:59:55to have a tribute sign, give respect to

1:59:58the city, tell people from coming in

2:00:00from the Keystone side, they're coming

2:00:02into downtown. And it's not just

2:00:05benefiting us, but it benefits the Row,

2:00:08Whitney Peak, all these other businesses

2:00:11downtown that we're welcoming people to

2:00:13come into. And I would say to my

2:00:16knowledge on the record there is no

2:00:19opposition from any downtown business in

2:00:22or around the existing arch that

2:00:25believes somehow we're taking business

2:00:27away from them or trying to replace this

2:00:29sign or otherwise. Everyone to my

2:00:31knowledge has taken the theme of rising

2:00:33tides lifts all ships. Thanks Jacobs for

2:00:36continuing to invest in Fourth Street.

2:00:38It's only going to benefit everyone else

2:00:40downtown. So, we love it and we

2:00:42hopefully um think the public will and

2:00:44it's almost like a a a gift to the

2:00:47community, for lack of a better term, to

2:00:49continue to uh uh preserve and

2:00:51acknowledge uh the great history of the

2:00:53city.

2:00:54>> Thank you,

2:00:57>> Commissioner McCoy.

2:00:59>> Thank you, Commissioner McCoy. For the

2:01:01record, uh

2:01:03kind of where to where to start on this?

2:01:05Um let's start with the design committee

2:01:08review guidelines because we we worked

2:01:10through that on October one. There were

2:01:11a lot of questions there. Um and kind of

2:01:15the starting point that we had on that

2:01:17committee was um essentially how are we

2:01:21supposed to review this project when the

2:01:24project is not complete? In other words,

2:01:27the the application provided was uh

2:01:31identifying a garage and some some

2:01:33pools. And those are all kind of future

2:01:35plans. Those could completely change

2:01:37tomorrow after a vote tonight. And so

2:01:41what I'm struggling with and and and

2:01:43hoping you can kind of help us

2:01:44understand a little bit is um

2:01:49how are we supposed to find that the

2:01:51skyways are essential to the project?

2:01:54and and I've heard that a couple times

2:01:56tonight and I just want to highlight

2:01:57that for my uh colleagues up here. Page

2:02:00two of the guidelines. It's the top of

2:02:02the paragraph, the last sentence

2:02:04explicitly states, "The burden of proof

2:02:06is on the applicant to demonstrate that

2:02:08a skyway is essential for the project

2:02:11and meets or exceeds the design

2:02:13guidelines." And so that's kind of my

2:02:15starting point tonight trying to

2:02:17understand this um from your perspective

2:02:19is why these two projects um these two

2:02:23skyways are essential to

2:02:27I don't I don't know what there's

2:02:29existing buildings that they're going to

2:02:31connect to obviously so I don't know

2:02:33that they're essential to those u

2:02:35certainly haven't seen evidence to that

2:02:37effect and then the um connecting

2:02:42um terminuses if you will the termin

2:02:43Gemini, uh, a proposed garage, proposed

2:02:46pools. Uh, I don't know, I haven't seen

2:02:50why these skyways are essential for

2:02:53those projects either. Um, and so that's

2:02:57that's kind of where I'd like to start.

2:02:59I mean, I I could I could get into some

2:03:00of the other things that we talked

2:03:02about, but for me, that's kind of the

2:03:04the big piece is how are these

2:03:07essential? And I and I heard you say,

2:03:09"Well, we need this to get money." And

2:03:11and I'm not trying to to step on that or

2:03:14or kind of ignore the realities of

2:03:17projects. Um but I don't know how this

2:03:21entitlement tonight is supposed to be

2:03:24justified on the fact that you need it

2:03:27to get financing

2:03:29to have a final project that we could

2:03:32find tonight um is essential for the

2:03:35Skyways to be a part of. Uh I've said a

2:03:38lot. I'll I'll kind of leave my first

2:03:39question there and see if you can help

2:03:41me kind of come to terms with that.

2:03:44>> Sure. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Chair.

2:03:45So, first of all, I didn't say this is

2:03:47to get money or that this is um needed

2:03:51for for financing. Um my point was that

2:03:55in order to um put together um the

2:03:59design and financing of the entire

2:04:00project, you need to have the

2:04:02entitlement in place so you can go out

2:04:03with the package and bundle it and get

2:04:05it financed and and designed. But the

2:04:08skyway is not just to to to get money. I

2:04:10I would refer you back to the purpose

2:04:13and intent of and this is the design

2:04:15guidelines where it says it's

2:04:17acknowledged as a finding fact the short

2:04:20block lengths that exist in downtown

2:04:22Reno make it difficult to provide

2:04:25large-scale projects to strengthen

2:04:27Reno's economy. So that's the baseline

2:04:29is there's an acknowledgement by the

2:04:30city of Reno. Downtown has short blocks

2:04:32and large projects are difficult to

2:04:34connect to which is why we have these

2:04:36pedestrian walkways. So number one, we

2:04:39needed to to put this development kind

2:04:42of connect connectivity standpoint

2:04:44that's critical for a lot of pedestrian

2:04:47activity from soccer fields which will

2:04:50be even more coming online from festival

2:04:53grounds. All your master plan policies

2:04:55encourage recreation and tourism and

2:04:58outdoor events. I promised when I came

2:05:00with the development agreement five

2:05:01years ago, we would activate downtown

2:05:04with tourism, entertainment, outdoor

2:05:05events, and that is happening now. We

2:05:08need to make sure we're connecting this

2:05:10entire project in a way that's safe for

2:05:12all that pedestrian activity. And I

2:05:14would submit to you this in fact does

2:05:16that. Now, to your point about well,

2:05:19what's going to be built on the other

2:05:20side? So, it definitely depends on if

2:05:23this body approves the Skyway or not,

2:05:25right? If you approve it, we'll design

2:05:27something one way. if you don't have to

2:05:28design it another way. And as if this is

2:05:32approved, as we get in there and

2:05:33continue designing, yeah, we might tweak

2:05:36what it what it connects to, right? And

2:05:38if it's permitted by right, we're

2:05:40allowed to do that today. If it requires

2:05:42a discretionary approval, we'll be back.

2:05:45But not to put words in Angela Fouse's

2:05:48mouth, but she answered your question,

2:05:51the specific question on the record at

2:05:53the design review hearing. And when you

2:05:55asked that question, she said

2:05:58absolutely when there is a proposed

2:06:01project that this would connect into, it

2:06:04has to comply still with the design

2:06:07review guidelines and the approval that

2:06:09you hopefully make today. We can't show

2:06:11up with a parking garage that looks like

2:06:15it's full of brick and looks like

2:06:17Wrigley Field. That certainly is not

2:06:19neon Line District. that's certainly not

2:06:22compatible with the design I'm showing

2:06:24you tonight or the retro sign. It can't

2:06:26be. And then she she meant she told you

2:06:28that said if staff looks at something

2:06:30and it's not compatible with what we're

2:06:33proposing, I on behalf of Jacobs would

2:06:36have to come back to you and the design

2:06:38review committee and talk about it, come

2:06:40back to the planning commission, and

2:06:42then come back to city council. And so

2:06:44it's a it's fair that we're still

2:06:46working through what it connects to and

2:06:49how it does, but if it does not comply

2:06:51with what you hopefully approved

2:06:53tonight, we have to in fact come back

2:06:56and do this all over again. And to give

2:06:59you certainty that I'm not just standing

2:07:01up here and asking you to take my word

2:07:03for it, staff put in a condition of

2:07:06approval

2:07:07that said these skyways cannot be built

2:07:10until what it connects to is built. And

2:07:13so it all has to happen at once to give

2:07:16staff certainty that what I'm

2:07:18representing to you and the application

2:07:19is submitted to you tonight is what in

2:07:21fact is built. So I think there's plenty

2:07:23of protections uh to address your

2:07:25questions.

2:07:26Chair, if I may, I just have a couple

2:07:28follow-ups.

2:07:32>> And [clears throat] it's on I'm not I'm

2:07:33not changing the subject.

2:07:34>> Um I I I kind of want to respond to that

2:07:36because I I see it as as two kind of

2:07:39distinct concepts in the in the

2:07:40guidelines. One is essentiality, right?

2:07:43How essential are these skyways? Two is

2:07:45the architectural compatibility, which I

2:07:47highlighted at our October 1st meeting.

2:07:49And for my colleagues looking at the

2:07:51design guideline um guidelines, it's

2:07:54page three uh number four, architectural

2:07:56compatibility. Architectural

2:07:58compatibility is the most important

2:08:00element of the design guidelines. I

2:08:02mean, it's explicit in those. And so I

2:08:03understand condition six might help

2:08:05ensure that whatever you decide to come

2:08:07up with is going to be compatible with

2:08:10the skyway and the existing structures.

2:08:12I have no doubt. I I do not question you

2:08:15when you come up here and say that that

2:08:17that's your intent. I have no reason to

2:08:18doubt it. And I I do not for me it's

2:08:20still the essentiality issue. You can

2:08:23build whatever you build uh and and they

2:08:26can make sure that it's going to be

2:08:27architecturally compliant and

2:08:29compatible, but how do we find tonight

2:08:31that it's essential to the project? And

2:08:34that's where I'm still kind of stuck,

2:08:36but we we can we can move on. I have a

2:08:38couple other questions. Um but I'll I'll

2:08:39yield some time now and and and see what

2:08:42else we have.

2:08:43>> Commissioner Valto,

2:08:45>> I just have a followup to that. That is

2:08:46a fascinating paragraph. Uh the

2:08:50paragraph that uses the term essential.

2:08:52Um so I I kind of want Do you have these

2:08:56guidelines in front of you, Garrett?

2:08:58>> Um I Yes.

2:09:02>> Um

2:09:03>> Madame Clerk, on the uh paragraph of

2:09:06interest is in exhibit C at the first

2:09:09paragraph of page two of the PDF.

2:09:12>> Thank you, Chair. If we can get that up

2:09:13on the screen for everyone, that would

2:09:16be appreciated.

2:09:22>> Which um which which page are you

2:09:24referring to? I have them right here.

2:09:25>> It's uh

2:09:26>> there it is.

2:09:27>> It's the bottom of the first page

2:09:29continuing on to the second page, that

2:09:32paragraph.

2:09:34So, um

2:09:36I guess I I kind of have a different

2:09:38reading of this paragraph than my

2:09:40colleague and I I think this paragraph

2:09:42is written relatively poorly. No

2:09:44disrespect to whoever drafted this, but

2:09:46it's written in a in a unique way. So um

2:09:49I guess I read this paragraph as saying

2:09:51these design guidelines cover normal

2:09:53situations and then it identifies unique

2:09:57situations in which the administrator

2:09:59authorizes alternative standards and

2:10:02under those that scenario where there

2:10:03are alternative standards then the

2:10:07burden is on the applicant to

2:10:08demonstrate the skyline essential but

2:10:10only when there's alternative standards

2:10:13deployed. Um I guess do you have

2:10:15thoughts on that and is this a scenario

2:10:17where there are alternative standards

2:10:18that are being deployed other than the

2:10:20guidelines in the

2:10:22>> and thank you for that question and I

2:10:23was eventually headed there but glad you

2:10:26you you brought this up. So absolutely

2:10:28the section you're reading deals with

2:10:31administr the administrator authorizing

2:10:33alternative standards provided by the

2:10:36proposals that we're asking for. We are

2:10:38not asking for any deviation

2:10:40or any change to the design guidelines

2:10:42and your staff has confirmed that we in

2:10:44fact comply with them. But even further

2:10:48there are specific legal findings in

2:10:50code for design guidelines and one of

2:10:52them is not

2:10:54you know you have to find some

2:10:55essentiality um finding that's just not

2:10:59there. So, I agree that that sentence is

2:11:02in here, but it deals with deviations,

2:11:05not the legal finding for a use permit

2:11:07for one of these.

2:11:10>> Do you recall, and you may, this may be

2:11:12a better question for for Leah. Does

2:11:14anybody recall when this was drafted, if

2:11:15that was the intent? I just I wasn't at

2:11:17the meeting. I don't remember when this

2:11:18was passed. I

2:11:20>> So, this was uh

2:11:22>> was 23, right? 2023. uh city council

2:11:25approved this uh document on the 12th of

2:11:29August 2020.

2:11:33That was when city council adopted this

2:11:36set of guidelines.

2:11:40>> Okay. All right. Thank you.

2:11:42>> Yeah, that paragraph. And I would also

2:11:43just note I mean that section

2:11:48falls under like I would argue the

2:11:51preamble or the recital or the purpose

2:11:53and intent. It is not later in those

2:11:56guidelines where you're really getting

2:11:57to the criteria and the specific

2:12:00findings that have to be made. So I

2:12:02don't believe I need to make any I do in

2:12:04fact for the record think they're

2:12:06important and essential to this project,

2:12:08but I don't think that's a legal finding

2:12:09that needs to be made by this body to

2:12:11approve this tonight.

2:12:13Uh, Commissioner Jockman, I'll ask a

2:12:15question. So, you mentioned earlier that

2:12:18you get your entitlements first. Um,

2:12:21isn't that because this is essential to

2:12:23the project? This won't happen without

2:12:26that.

2:12:27>> That's another way to say it, Mr.

2:12:29Chairman. I I would agree with that.

2:12:32>> Okay. Thank you.

2:12:42It looks like Commissioner Basera has

2:12:43his hand raised on.

2:12:44>> Commissioner Bisera,

2:12:46>> howdy. Um, yeah, I'll weigh in here a

2:12:48little bit. Um, good conversation. Um,

2:12:51hi everyone. And, uh, I I definitely

2:12:53appreciate the soccer fields, uh, that

2:12:55the J Resort has offered. Those

2:12:57definitely have seem like a good amenity

2:12:59for families in the community and folks

2:13:01visiting. But I do want to just kind of

2:13:03build upon Commissioner McCoy's remarks

2:13:06uh just to get clarity because there

2:13:07seems to be some differing ways of

2:13:09interpreting this language. And so I

2:13:11guess uh maybe for Leah, for um Lauren

2:13:14and others to help us understand and

2:13:17reconcile these differences. So, h how

2:13:21can how can this body best look at

2:13:25um making the finding of essentuality,

2:13:28that key word that we're talking a lot

2:13:30about tonight, uh the finding of

2:13:32essentuality to to tonight rather than

2:13:37approving a permanent structure for

2:13:38unpermitted buildings. And I and I do

2:13:41understand uh Garrett's remarks about

2:13:43entitlements often being necessary to

2:13:45secure other steps because I've been a

2:13:47part of those for other projects. But in

2:13:49this particular case, I guess I'm

2:13:51curious because our Skywayade code um

2:13:54seems to require the opposite order of

2:13:56operations for whatever reason, right?

2:13:58This was done before my time on the

2:14:00commission. It essentially says that a

2:14:03skyway must be essential to an actual

2:14:05project. Yet here there is no active

2:14:07destination before us to evaluate. The

2:14:10rendering is cool, you know, but it it's

2:14:12not before us. So how should we

2:14:14reconcile this?

2:14:16>> If I may, Mr. Chairman, thank you. Uh,

2:14:18Commissioner Bera, always appreciate

2:14:20your insightful comments. So let me just

2:14:22go back because I kind of want to just

2:14:24hammer on what Commissioner Belto said.

2:14:26I'm reading page one going to page two.

2:14:28It is anticipated that unusual or

2:14:31extraordinary sit situations will give

2:14:35rise to these alternative standards for

2:14:38skyway design.

2:14:40>> Same paragraph. We need to demonstrate

2:14:43the skyway is essential

2:14:45if you're making tweaks to the skyway

2:14:48design guidelines. We are not like we

2:14:50are not making any changes. We are in

2:14:52100% compliance with with this document.

2:14:55So that paragraph I would argue is not

2:14:57applicable to what we're doing tonight.

2:15:00But secondly, I will still stand up here

2:15:02and argue and and assert that this is

2:15:04absolutely essential for this project is

2:15:07moving families from soccer, moving

2:15:10families and residents who live in uh

2:15:13apartments uh and condominiums and

2:15:15housing downtown to get to the Glow

2:15:17Plaza crossing multiple blocks. Um the

2:15:21we can't forget the um Fourth of July

2:15:23parade just happened down Fourth Street,

2:15:25right? You don't want midblock people

2:15:28crossing in the middle of a parade. You

2:15:30want them crossing up and over the

2:15:33parade. So, I think there's numerous

2:15:35reasons for this is essential given

2:15:37events downtown, given these roads uh

2:15:41are certainly busy for hot August

2:15:42nights, for street vibrations, and for

2:15:45the project itself, all the families for

2:15:47soccer, all the festival grounds. Like,

2:15:50I was hammered at this commission for

2:15:52the for the development agreement to

2:15:54activate downtown with families,

2:15:56activate downtown with tourism, and

2:15:58activate downtown with residents. And we

2:15:59want it outdoors, and we want some green

2:16:01space. We have now green space. We have

2:16:04now families downtown. We have now

2:16:06activation downtown. It's now essential

2:16:08to make sure everyone stays safe for

2:16:10purposes of all this activity that

2:16:13that's here today and that will come in

2:16:15the future. So these two walkways are

2:16:18absolutely essential, Commissioner uh

2:16:20Basera um to this project.

2:16:24>> Okay. And so I'll just a little follow

2:16:26up there then Garrett. Um because you

2:16:28mentioned the the safety component and

2:16:30and and no doubt like I appreciate your

2:16:32work too this whole time and you always

2:16:36do try to do the best you know by by us

2:16:38and and your clients. So you mentioned

2:16:41um the safety component. [clears throat]

2:16:43So with the recent West Fourth Street

2:16:45downtown project completed, you know, in

2:16:47partnership with a bunch of local

2:16:49stakeholders,

2:16:50uh that invested heavily in those wider

2:16:53sidewalks, the ADA ramps and new street

2:16:55lights, uh precisely to make that

2:16:58corridor safe and walkable at street

2:17:00level, like how do how does how does the

2:17:03Jay and I guess staff as well in this

2:17:05question reconcile

2:17:07claims that Westfor Street is unsafe for

2:17:10pedestrians with the multi-million

2:17:12dollar investment just made to enh

2:17:13enhance pedestrian safety and activity.

2:17:16>> And I think commissioner, the last words

2:17:19you used are the most important. It's

2:17:20enh it's it's enhancing, right?

2:17:23>> And RTC director Bill Thomas, who was on

2:17:26the design review committee, RTC just

2:17:29paid for those lights and it's paying

2:17:31for those improvements. So I would

2:17:33submit to you tonight if I'm standing

2:17:34before you and I have the RTC director

2:17:36saying, "Absolutely not. We wasted our

2:17:39money on this. if you put Skyways up

2:17:41there, this isn't compatible with what

2:17:43we did. I would have a problem. But he

2:17:45said the absolute opposite. The RTC

2:17:48director said, "This is fantastic." Why?

2:17:51Because one, from the aesthetic point of

2:17:53view, it can match the lights we just

2:17:55invested. It can match the streetscape.

2:17:57It accentuates the streetscape. It adds

2:18:00it It doesn't say that you can't walk on

2:18:02the street. There's still going to be

2:18:03plenty of people walking on the street

2:18:07with these skyways in the air. We're

2:18:10just saying to com to connect some

2:18:12amenities on the north side of Fourth

2:18:13Street, connect the parking garage on

2:18:16the on the west side of Rston is giving

2:18:19uh pedestrians another option if the

2:18:23weather is bad. Another option if there

2:18:26is uh crazy traffic that day or that

2:18:28weekend. uh maybe they don't feel safe

2:18:30at night when it's dark with your

2:18:32family, so you can walk through there.

2:18:33There's numerous reasons why this is

2:18:35enhancing the pedestrian experience. So,

2:18:37I don't have to make a finding that, you

2:18:39know, there's a big public safety

2:18:40problem and this is fixing all the

2:18:42public safety issues. This is enhancing

2:18:45the um experience given all the

2:18:47investments that that that has been put

2:18:49in this area. And I would say don't take

2:18:51my word for it, but take from the it's

2:18:53in the minutes from the design review

2:18:56committee from Mr. Thomas, who again RTC

2:18:58spent their money on these improvements,

2:19:01who had no concerns or objections with

2:19:03this proposal.

2:19:05>> Okay, great. Thanks, Gary. And you know,

2:19:07I I have a few more, but I'll yield for

2:19:09a little bit, but we can volley with

2:19:10others.

2:19:14>> Okay. Uh, can I go?

2:19:15>> You haven't spoke first yet. I'm just

2:19:17thinking.

2:19:18>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question

2:19:20for staff, please.

2:19:23>> We're going back to essential.

2:19:27We're going to beat this one. Um I I

2:19:30think it's hard to operate when you

2:19:31don't have a definition of what

2:19:32essential means, but um in your opinion,

2:19:36does essential mean the project can't

2:19:37function without the skyway or that

2:19:40they're integral on how it operates? And

2:19:42does your condition six fix that?

2:19:45Satisfy, sorry.

2:19:47>> Leah Picotti for the record. Um,

2:19:52in looking at this, we [snorts] see this

2:19:54as an expansion of the J Resort and

2:19:57these walkways as connecting that

2:20:00facility and providing a safe walkway

2:20:05for people to that doesn't mean that

2:20:08they're taking away from the street

2:20:09activity, just means that they're

2:20:11providing an alternative route. And

2:20:16in our review of this, staff found that

2:20:18this is essential to that. That when you

2:20:21are building your resort on multiple

2:20:24pieces of property with fairly busy

2:20:26roads in between, that providing that

2:20:28alternative to

2:20:31guests and Reno residents and everybody

2:20:35else is essential.

2:20:37>> Great. Thanks. One more question. Um,

2:20:40are the people that are using the skyway

2:20:42to the parking garage and the people

2:20:43that are walking on the street the same

2:20:44people?

2:20:45>> I don't think they're the same people.

2:20:47>> Okay. Thank you.

2:20:51>> Uh, Commissioner McCoy, I believe you

2:20:52had your hand raised.

2:20:54>> Yeah, I've got I've got some more

2:20:55questions. Let's let's take a look at uh

2:20:57design and I wonder if the applicant if

2:20:59we can get the applicant's presentation

2:21:02back up. Page 12, I believe is what I

2:21:05had marked in their application.

2:21:19>> [clears throat]

2:21:20>> There we go. Thank you. Uh

2:21:25so we we talked about this as well, the

2:21:27signage issue, and this is uh page 11,

2:21:30paragraph 17, sub A. Signage should not

2:21:34dominate the Skyway facade. rather it

2:21:37should complement the existing buildings

2:21:39and overall design of the skyway. And my

2:21:41comment at at the at that meeting as

2:21:45well as tonight is that for me that sign

2:21:47still dominates the skyway facade.

2:21:50That's the first thing I see it. In

2:21:52fact, I believe um when we discussed it,

2:21:55it was kind of, you know,

2:21:58the Reno Arch itself was chosen to kind

2:22:00of be flashy and be be attention

2:22:02drawing. um I believe is what the

2:22:05architect had had said. Um and so for me

2:22:09it still very much dominates that

2:22:12skyway. And so I don't know if there's

2:22:13any discussion after the fact um about

2:22:17the scale or what you guys had talked or

2:22:19thought about or if you felt that that

2:22:21was you know good enough or

2:22:26>> do you remember that?

2:22:27>> I remember that. So yeah, thank you for

2:22:29that that comment. So, well, one, it's

2:22:32questionable whether that that's even a

2:22:34sign, right? It's on premise signs and

2:22:36off- premise signs. So, that doesn't say

2:22:39J Resort, that doesn't say Coca-Cola,

2:22:43that doesn't say um you know uh come

2:22:48visit uh the row, right? It's

2:22:51identifying the city. It's like a almost

2:22:53like a street sign, you could argue. I

2:22:55mean, it's a piece uh I mean street or

2:22:58it's art like artwork cuz for example

2:23:01>> when I put up replica sign I didn't Mr.

2:23:04Jacobs at the Globe Plaza all those

2:23:06replica signs that went up those didn't

2:23:08require like coming to planning

2:23:09commission. So that piece of art, that

2:23:13area identification sign, if you want to

2:23:16classify it as a sign, that tribute,

2:23:18that tribute sign, that replica sign,

2:23:20whatever it is, we think it's just part

2:23:22of the design. We think it is a really

2:23:26cool um component that complies with the

2:23:30overlay district of the development

2:23:32agreement which requires neon theme

2:23:35which requires art theme which requires

2:23:38compatibility with other pieces of the

2:23:40district which we have all those replica

2:23:41signs at the glow plaza. So we'd like to

2:23:45keep it as is. We think it adds we've

2:23:48gotten a lot of positive feedback on it.

2:23:50Um, it adds a really cool component to

2:23:53it. And I think if you took it off and

2:23:56then you had the skyway, I I personally

2:23:59think and I think some of the public

2:24:01does as well that putting it on adds a

2:24:03really cool component to it. And so I

2:24:06don't think this body might the

2:24:07application before you is not to allow

2:24:10us to put up a sign. It's to what's the

2:24:13design and the artwork and the elements

2:24:15of the skyway going to look like. So a

2:24:17long way of saying we did appreciate

2:24:18your comment. Um, but we do really um

2:24:22think the architects did a great job and

2:24:24we feel like it's going to enhance

2:24:27uh the district and downtown Reno.

2:24:30>> Okay. Commissioner McCoy, for the

2:24:31record, just follow up. So, um, and just

2:24:34to be clear, coolness is not a finding

2:24:36I'm looking to make tonight. So, I'm not

2:24:38disagreeing with you one way or the

2:24:40other on how that looks or or its cool

2:24:42factor. What I'm trying to ascertain,

2:24:44and it sounds like what you're saying is

2:24:45you don't see this as a sign. This is

2:24:47art. If that's your if that's your

2:24:49position, we don't need to talk anymore

2:24:51about signage should not dominate

2:24:53because it's just that that's it. Uh we

2:24:56we can move on. One of my my colleagues

2:24:59had asked earlier about whether or not

2:25:00there's a condition for 24 access. Is

2:25:03that something that you have uh

2:25:05considered or would consider uh if this

2:25:07project were to go forward tonight?

2:25:08adding a condition that um 24hour access

2:25:14to the public for these skyways subject

2:25:17obviously to needs for maintenance or

2:25:19cleaning those types of things. Is that

2:25:21something you would uh consider?

2:25:23>> Um I would say for the record that

2:25:27condition should not be placed on here.

2:25:28That condition was not placed on the

2:25:30Atlantis. That condition was not placed

2:25:32on the row. That condition was not

2:25:33placed on Hara. So we would not put that

2:25:36condition on. But let me say for

2:25:38purposes of operations like there's

2:25:41really no reason not to have that open

2:25:4324 hours to move people uh around given

2:25:46the expense of building those um is

2:25:49pretty significant.

2:25:51Okay. And chair if I may just one more

2:25:53followup um for the applicant. So the

2:25:57code is supposed to kind of protect

2:25:59street level pedestrian activity, but I

2:26:02feel like some of your application even

2:26:03said that this is going to reduce

2:26:05pedestrian activity at the street level

2:26:06and kind of identified that as a

2:26:08benefit. And I guess what I'm looking

2:26:10for is what evidence to kind of help

2:26:12reconcile those two issues. What

2:26:14evidence shows that these skyways won't

2:26:16hurt the sidewalks in the businesses

2:26:18below?

2:26:20>> That's I think

2:26:21>> I think you can look at this picture,

2:26:22right? RTC put those lights in. We're

2:26:26not tearing out those brand new lights.

2:26:28Uh we as a requirement of building on

2:26:31both sides of the street, you have your

2:26:34redevelopment downtown streetscape

2:26:36standards. Um we've complied not only

2:26:38complied but went above and beyond with

2:26:41the landscaping, with the sidewalks,

2:26:43with the pavers, all that remains. We're

2:26:46not asking to tear anything out that

2:26:48you're currently uh enjoying. And of

2:26:52course to use a skyway you have to walk

2:26:55along this area in order to go into the

2:26:58Jay and eventually go over the street.

2:27:01So people are going to continue to use

2:27:03the pedestrian

2:27:04uh corridors. And I would say as we add

2:27:07more amenities,

2:27:09as we add more things to do downtown, as

2:27:11we continue to activate, it's just going

2:27:14to continue to bring more and more

2:27:16people to this area. So when we do

2:27:18construct what's north of Fourth Street,

2:27:20you're going to have a lot more people

2:27:21using the sidewalks in addition to using

2:27:24the skyway. As we continue to have we're

2:27:27in our third year of festival grounds

2:27:28and each year more people show up. Each

2:27:31year we add another event. Hopefully we

2:27:33have events every every weekend, you

2:27:35know, subject to our requirements in the

2:27:37use permit. But all those people are

2:27:39also walking around downtown. They're

2:27:42walking down the Golden Silver. They're

2:27:44walking over to the road to have dinner

2:27:45before the concert. They're all walking

2:27:47around. So adding an element of a skyway

2:27:50is absolute to new development across

2:27:53the street is absolutely giving more

2:27:55people a reason to come downtown, be

2:27:57inside and be outside and enjoy all the

2:28:01existing and additional amenities for

2:28:03downtown. So I think this piece is

2:28:05essential to continue to enhance and

2:28:08increase activation and pedestrian

2:28:10activity in downtown Reno.

2:28:17Do we have any other questions from the

2:28:19commission? And I So we'll go to

2:28:21Commissioner Delvr. This is a clerical

2:28:23item for everyone in the room. We will

2:28:25take a 5m minute break. Commissioner

2:28:27Williams requested that after this item.

2:28:30So if you would like to step out,

2:28:32there's also a restroom on the second

2:28:33floor. Um if you are not here for this

2:28:36item, but here for the next item, feel

2:28:37free to do so. you will be let back in

2:28:40and we'll let everyone know if they're

2:28:42out there that we'll be reconvening.

2:28:45Commissioner Delvr.

2:28:47>> Thank you, Commissioner Delvr. Um, this

2:28:49question is for for you, Garrett, but it

2:28:51might also um be an interesting one for

2:28:54for Leah and the city in general, and

2:28:56that is like what specifically would

2:28:59fail

2:29:01or become unworkable, if you will, um,

2:29:03if the Skyway is not built like

2:29:08what how does this impact

2:29:11everything that you've been talking

2:29:13about?

2:29:16>> To, you know, not to speak for Mr.

2:29:18Jacobs, but I'm sure what's across the

2:29:20street is delayed in getting built or

2:29:22doesn't get built. I mean, he believes

2:29:24and has spent significant resources in

2:29:26designing these that these are critical

2:29:29to continue the growth of the district

2:29:32and continue the growth of activation

2:29:34for downtown. So without these in his

2:29:38mind and I think everyone's uh as the

2:29:41record reflects today the essential

2:29:43nature of these pedestrian walkways uh

2:29:47it would be back to the drawing board

2:29:48and I couldn't commit to timing or what

2:29:51the project would look like.

2:29:52>> So you couldn't build a garage or a spa

2:29:54without them or

2:29:57>> I'll I'll put on the record today we it

2:29:59would I don't believe the spa or the

2:30:01garage would would be built without

2:30:03these skyways.

2:30:04>> Okay. Thank you.

2:30:08Yes,

2:30:10>> Commissioner [clears throat]

2:30:10McKenzie. I think we've been talking a

2:30:13lot about safety and pedestrian and

2:30:15taking people off of the street and

2:30:17shoving them into these tunnels or not.

2:30:20And who are the people walking on the

2:30:21street? Are they the same as the J

2:30:23customers coming from the garage into

2:30:25the into the main buildings? I think one

2:30:28of the things we might be missing

2:30:29talking about, and maybe you can help

2:30:31with clarification, is peak traffic.

2:30:33Anybody who's ever been to a game at

2:30:35Lawler knows everybody crams in there

2:30:38and then when the event is over there

2:30:41are thousands of people. And the same

2:30:44thing happens with it concerts. Same

2:30:46thing happens with the soccer games with

2:30:48the kids that it's over as soon as it's

2:30:50dark. Like how many families are going

2:30:52to be trying to go home at 6:00 at the

2:30:55same time? Those are not going to be the

2:30:57same people that are wandering around

2:30:58looking at the artwork or getting ready

2:31:01to go to to um a festival event or

2:31:04something like that. But there are peak

2:31:06traffic times when a whole bunch of

2:31:08pedestrians can potentially be on the

2:31:10sidewalk at the same crosswalk at the

2:31:13same time. That creates a safety

2:31:15problem.

2:31:17And I think that that's solved or at

2:31:20least enhanced by these skyways if for

2:31:24no other reason than for those specific

2:31:26peak times. Am I correct?

2:31:28>> I I believe you're absolutely correct.

2:31:31And I've kind of been a little remiss in

2:31:33not mentioning the most recent skyway

2:31:35that was approved by the city was UNRS.

2:31:37So to your point, there was a finding

2:31:39made um to move people from that parking

2:31:42garage up and over campus for that

2:31:45reason. game days before and after, you

2:31:49know, student safety, fraternity, party

2:31:51on one side and going to classes on the

2:31:53other is that pedestrian safety element

2:31:55of why you and Ir built one over a

2:31:58street. So, I I would absolutely agree

2:32:00with you. We're we're we're really

2:32:01excited that there's a bunch of new

2:32:03people downtown getting dumped outside

2:32:06after events, but we need to make sure

2:32:08that they remain safe. So, thank you,

2:32:10Commissioner. I agree.

2:32:11>> Thank you. I just want to add one more

2:32:13thing, Commissioner McKenzie. If there's

2:32:15a whole line of people, they're going to

2:32:17be waiting at a traffic light for maybe

2:32:19two or three turns of that traffic

2:32:21light. They get impatient. They dart out

2:32:24in the street. There's all kinds of

2:32:25reasons why we need to get a huge amount

2:32:28of people off the street at peak times,

2:32:30not necessarily trying to pull people

2:32:32off and tunnel them all into the Jay.

2:32:36>> Thank you,

2:32:38Commissioner Williams.

2:32:40>> Uh, Commissioner Williams, I think I got

2:32:41for staff or maybe Miss Knox, I'm not

2:32:43sure.

2:32:47I need your help. Uh, what I'm reading

2:32:49is the Skyway Code measures pedestrian

2:32:52impact through the frontage owner

2:32:54consent of 75%.

2:32:57>> Right. That was set by council. Yes.

2:32:59>> To address this issue of of people on in

2:33:02those areas.

2:33:04>> Exactly.

2:33:05>> Am I wrong to say that it appears that

2:33:07this applicant controls 100% of that

2:33:10area?

2:33:10>> You are correct.

2:33:11>> Okay. So just by that it meets the

2:33:14standards that council has already set

2:33:16for frontage road and pedestrian impact

2:33:19to local businesses.

2:33:21>> Correct. If there were a whole bunch of

2:33:22little local businesses there and they

2:33:24were going to build this, we want their

2:33:26input and their consent to say, "Hey,

2:33:28we're taking people off the street." In

2:33:30this particular case, that's that's not

2:33:32the case.

2:33:33>> Okay. Awesome. Thank you, Miss Picotti.

2:33:38>> Do we have any other questions from the

2:33:40commission? And I cannot see if there's

2:33:43any questions online.

2:33:44>> Uh, Commissioner Ber, I'll take

2:33:46>> Please proceed.

2:33:47>> Great. Thank you. Um, yeah, just want to

2:33:50go back. Uh, uh, Garrett mentioned the

2:33:53UN and our uh, parking garage uh, which

2:33:55has a Skyway and I did have a question

2:33:58around that, but um, I think I did want

2:34:00to clarify though. I I think um yes uh

2:34:04that the the Skyway helps with like

2:34:06games and getting people across, but I

2:34:09think from my understanding and staff

2:34:11might need to help me here, but just to

2:34:13semi correct the record is that it was

2:34:16also driven for ADA reasons for for uh

2:34:20not necessarily for like games and of

2:34:22sorts, right?

2:34:24>> Can can staff elaborate on that?

2:34:28>> Thank you for your question. And I yeah

2:34:30I can rephrase the question like what

2:34:31was the impetus for the skyway at the

2:34:34university and and in it like coupled

2:34:37with that was the skyway uh done was the

2:34:41skyway approved or done before the

2:34:44parking garage like the project before

2:34:46us tonight or was it a different order

2:34:48or something else?

2:34:51>> Um it's a good question but I don't I

2:34:55don't think we have the answer. Um I I

2:34:57just don't have a lot of information on

2:34:59that particular one. But what what I can

2:35:01say is that um EDA accessible access is

2:35:07definitely one of the reasons that the

2:35:10applicant stated in their application

2:35:12that they wanted to build these skyways.

2:35:16>> Okay, great. Thank you.

2:35:19Um, and uh there there's been talks too

2:35:22about the usage of the uh I guess we're

2:35:25calling it art now. I'm not sure if that

2:35:27that's [clears throat] what was agreed

2:35:28to, but um I believe one of my

2:35:31colleagues mentioned uh that we're we're

2:35:34now referring to the signage as art. Um

2:35:37but it's still contentious because it's

2:35:38historic and um we're we're a proud

2:35:41people here in Reno for for good

2:35:43reasons. Uh me being a lifelong Reno I

2:35:46as well. So I was kind of curious who

2:35:48owns the usage rights for the Reno Arch.

2:35:52Do we know? Is that City of Reno? Is

2:35:55that another entity? Is that uh in in

2:35:59the in the public domain?

2:36:01>> If I may, Mr. Chairman,

2:36:03>> please.

2:36:03>> Commissioner Bera. So that trademark is

2:36:06owned by RSCBA and RSCBA has no

2:36:11objection to us um using that mark for

2:36:14this skyway.

2:36:16>> Okay. Good. And um are they able to

2:36:19provide like a letter of support or memo

2:36:21or something like that just just to uh

2:36:25provide reassurances to stakeholders? We

2:36:28feel confident there will be a a letter

2:36:30or something written on the record uh

2:36:33prior to uh city council's vote.

2:36:36>> Great. And then and the RCBA

2:36:40uh just for everyone's edification, what

2:36:43is that and and who do they report to?

2:36:46>> Uh the Reno Sparks Visitors and

2:36:48Convention Authority. Um that body is a

2:36:51creature of Nevada State Law. Um the

2:36:54board consists of both elected and

2:36:56appointed officials. Um and they are

2:37:00responsible for collecting room tax and

2:37:02using that tax to uh promote uh the

2:37:06biggest little city in the world, Reno.

2:37:08>> Got it. Okay, great. Thanks. So

2:37:10essentially they they are probably

2:37:13majority made it it's it's predominantly

2:37:16consistent of public officials who

2:37:20report back to the community

2:37:21essentially, right? Um, so I'm just

2:37:23trying to reconcile uh uh the public's

2:37:26interest here and what's before us. Um,

2:37:29thank you.

2:37:30>> Thank you.

2:37:31>> Yep.

2:37:34>> Do we seeing no further questions from

2:37:36the commission, we can now move to is

2:37:39that a question or we can move to

2:37:40deliberation. Commissioner Valto.

2:37:43>> Uh, happy to get started. Um, I can

2:37:46support this project and make the

2:37:47findings. I think it's consistent with

2:37:48the master plan. uh it's been very well

2:37:51vetted uh and I understand the extension

2:37:53request and would be uh supportive of

2:37:56the condition modification from the

2:37:58applicant. Uh there's two things I want

2:38:00to touch on that came up during our

2:38:01conversations and I think first you know

2:38:04essentially our dialogue got really

2:38:05focused on essential. Um I think this is

2:38:07kind of a red herring. I don't think the

2:38:09guidelines require essentiality. I read

2:38:12the guidelines of requiring essentiality

2:38:14when we're talking about um

2:38:16administrative changes in unique

2:38:18circumstances which I don't think is the

2:38:20context here but even assuming like

2:38:23there was an essential requirement I

2:38:25don't recall this being addressed when

2:38:28the university's walkway came up to the

2:38:31extent there was essential discussions

2:38:33it had to do with connecting it to the

2:38:34park uh to the parking garage which that

2:38:37same circumstance would apply here if we

2:38:39have too uh rigid of a reading of the

2:38:41word essential. I don't know what when

2:38:44there would be something that is

2:38:46essential for there to be a walkway. It

2:38:48seems like if we say essential in its

2:38:49truest term, it's like the scenario

2:38:52where you have two buildings across the

2:38:54street, very local seismic activity in

2:38:57the middle and you can't possibly walk

2:38:59across the street. If you understand

2:39:02essential more colloquially and kind of

2:39:03more in the context that we use it,

2:39:05which is more critical, I think the

2:39:06applicant has demonstrated that there is

2:39:08a critical need for this to develop the

2:39:10project.

2:39:11Um, kind of the next point, this 24-hour

2:39:14access to the public issue. I don't know

2:39:17how we could write a condition that

2:39:19wouldn't infringe on property rights for

2:39:21the casino. Like the minute you create a

2:39:2324-hour right of access, you also create

2:39:27a public forum. And given that this is

2:39:29private property and a casino, I'd be

2:39:32very concerned that would create issues

2:39:33with like gaming control board. The kind

2:39:36of example that comes to mind is, you

2:39:37know, problem gamblers are able to

2:39:40self-exclude from a casino if you made

2:39:43it a public forum. I'm not sure how a

2:39:45casino could ever enforce that because a

2:39:47person would have a right to go there.

2:39:49I'm sure there are other examples as to

2:39:51why it doesn't make sense necessarily

2:39:52for a casino to have a be considered

2:39:54like a public forum where you have a

2:39:56right to access, but that's just one

2:39:57example I think makes it a little

2:39:59problematic. Um, so you know, with that

2:40:02said, I think the Skyway findings are

2:40:04easy to make for me. I I can make those

2:40:06findings based on what I've seen. Um,

2:40:08and last thing on the sign, I think it's

2:40:10a a respectful take on this. You know,

2:40:13living in Northwest Reno, I often times

2:40:15drive down fourth when I come into town.

2:40:18It's nice [clears throat] to have that

2:40:19entry into the downtown core and be

2:40:22inviting for uh people that are coming

2:40:24from from the IAD. So, that's my take on

2:40:27it, and I think I can make the findings

2:40:30Commissioner McCoy, for the record, I I

2:40:32think if you ask two attorneys for an

2:40:34opinion, you might get three answers.

2:40:36So, I I I appreciate that. Um, I'm just

2:40:39going to highlight a little bit about

2:40:40where I'm coming from and what I see in

2:40:42these guidelines. Article one, if you

2:40:45will, paragraph one, purpose and intent.

2:40:47It's four paragraphs that the whole

2:40:50subject of it is on purpose and intent.

2:40:52Very first sentence, skyways provide an

2:40:55opportunity to increase the economic

2:40:56viability of a project. Last sentence

2:41:02of the

2:41:04second paragraph, the burden of the

2:41:06proof is on the applicant to demonstrate

2:41:07that a skyway is essential for the

2:41:09project and meets or exceeds the design

2:41:11guidelines. So, that's where I'm at.

2:41:16It's where I started. It's where I am

2:41:18now. Um I will also highlight the fact

2:41:20that in that same paragraph sentence

2:41:22above meeting the requirements of the

2:41:24section does not guarantee approval of

2:41:26the skyway. So even if we all agree that

2:41:28this met the criteria doesn't

2:41:31necessarily mean uh guarante guaranteed

2:41:34approval of the skyway. Um I also want

2:41:37to highlight this is on page four design

2:41:40number six. The primary objective of the

2:41:42recommendations given throughout this

2:41:43text is to achieve continuity in the

2:41:46design of the new sky buildings

2:41:48constructed between existing or new

2:41:51building facades. We are missing the

2:41:54other half of each of those skyways.

2:41:56Whether it's existing or it's going to

2:41:58be new, we don't have that information.

2:42:00We have theoretical. And so I remain

2:42:02concerned tonight that we've been asked

2:42:04to provide

2:42:06confirmation and approval for Skyways to

2:42:09nowhere. That is not going to change u

2:42:12for me. Um and so I think given given

2:42:15all that and and I appreciate condition

2:42:17six on the future. We'll make sure it's

2:42:20compatible. We promise, you know,

2:42:21fingers crossed. Um, but that doesn't

2:42:24supplant the finding I feel like I need

2:42:25to make tonight, which is that the

2:42:28existing

2:42:30building connecting through a skyway to

2:42:32the as yet unbuilt, unpermitted um,

2:42:36termini uh, is compatible. I cannot make

2:42:39that. It's just a condition I cannot I

2:42:41cannot make and uh, that is where I am

2:42:43tonight. So, thank you.

2:42:51Do we have any other requests to speak

2:42:54during deliberation?

2:42:55>> Sure, I will. Commissioner Delvi, uh, I

2:42:59share the same sentiments as

2:43:01Commissioner McCoy. This has obviously

2:43:03been um a concern of mine. The what do

2:43:07we what are we trying to approve? What

2:43:09is it what does it mean? Um, how do we

2:43:12how [clears throat] do we get there? Um,

2:43:13I feel like we have not been able to

2:43:16truly understand how the skyways

2:43:19um are essential to the project. I I

2:43:22know I know Gary, you tried to, you

2:43:24know, kind of work through that. Um, but

2:43:25I'm still not necessarily seeing that.

2:43:28Um, and and again to Commissioner

2:43:32McCoy's point, I you know, I just it's

2:43:36just hard for me to understand sort of

2:43:39why this was separated and we have to do

2:43:41it first before some of these other

2:43:43pieces come before us. And so it is hard

2:43:46for me to say yes, I think this would be

2:43:48compatible because again, we don't

2:43:50actually know what what that looks like.

2:43:52So I have some issues with

2:43:53compatibility. Um I have some concerns

2:43:56with public benefit. you know, will

2:43:58they, won't they? I understand public,

2:44:00it's a private property, and I I'm to

2:44:03Commissioner Velto's point, I don't

2:44:04think we should put a condition on it.

2:44:06Um, but it does it does bring up um, you

2:44:10know, concerns and questions that I

2:44:11have. I'm not even going to get into the

2:44:13design of the art or skyway or anything

2:44:16like that. I'm not I'm not even going to

2:44:17touch that.

2:44:21>> Uh, Commissioner Jockman, I may pause

2:44:23and say some more at the end. Uh,

2:44:26hearing all this, my recommendation to

2:44:28council is to consider revising the

2:44:30guidelines. Uh, we've got a clause here

2:44:33that says it must be essential. I

2:44:36personally don't think we would see an

2:44:38applicant representative like Mr. Gordon

2:44:40before us if the request were not

2:44:43essential on some level, but I'm not an

2:44:45attorney, so I'm not the best person to

2:44:47weigh in on that. The other part

2:44:51[clears throat] about whether or not

2:44:52it's a new building or proposed and if

2:44:54the facade should match it. Well, okay,

2:44:57we've we've got things that are

2:44:58conflicting here. I recognize too this

2:45:01came through in 2020. This was a split

2:45:02vote by council. So, this could result

2:45:04in more uh work for staff with a split

2:45:07council that I just want to apologize

2:45:10that you guys might have to deal with

2:45:11that. But, I I I can see some flaws in

2:45:14these guidelines. I'm an engineer. I

2:45:17prefer legal findings. I prefer

2:45:20specificity in these and I see a lot of

2:45:22gray areas in the guidelines which are

2:45:24listed as our first finding. Excuse me,

2:45:27not not our first finding. Um, but they

2:45:30are as well as mentioning the tunnel

2:45:32effect. So, I I have some pause there. I

2:45:36also don't like the phrasing of the

2:45:38fourth finding, but I recognize that

2:45:40those are the findings that city council

2:45:42has asked us to review uh with our

2:45:45recommendation before it goes before

2:45:47them. I'll pause now.

2:45:54Commissioner Belto

2:45:57mean happy to I hear your concern about

2:45:59this new existing building thing uh

2:46:02issue. Um,

2:46:05the sky bridge has to connect to

2:46:06something and will connect to a new

2:46:08building. I think that's one of the

2:46:09conditions. So, if we're looking at

2:46:12existing building, there's a building,

2:46:14you're building a skyway. New building,

2:46:17there will be a building and you will

2:46:18connect it. I don't think there's any

2:46:20language in these guidelines that say it

2:46:22has to exist before the application

2:46:23comes forward. So, that that's really

2:46:26how I read that portion of the

2:46:28guidelines. And but that the other

2:46:31portion you're talking about the general

2:46:33guideline language I I tend to agree

2:46:35with that. It's could be written better.

2:46:42Commissioner Ber for the record. Um I I

2:46:46share sentiments with uh uh

2:46:49commissioners uh McCoy chair um Jackman

2:46:53and uh Delviar.

2:46:56And I I too, you know, I like

2:46:58specificity. Uh I like predictability

2:47:01for residents and for our applicants, uh

2:47:04for developers. Um

2:47:07it is a tough one. Um and I think that

2:47:12to Commissioner Belto's last point about

2:47:14like, you know, thinking about what a

2:47:16skyway would be built towards

2:47:18eventually, we would then have to

2:47:20hypothetically consider what a building

2:47:22would look like or how tall it would

2:47:24look like. And I know in the downtown

2:47:26corridor it can go, you know, a little

2:47:28higher than than most other places. Uh

2:47:30but then if I look at it that way, I

2:47:33would then have to say, well, is the

2:47:35skyway enabling a potential um uh

2:47:40blockage of the Sier Neadas, for

2:47:42instance, for residents, right, that

2:47:43exists now along that corridor. So, a

2:47:45lot to weigh here. So, thanks everyone.

2:47:50>> Commissioner Belveltto,

2:47:53you turn your microphone. Oh, just ready

2:47:54to make a motion whenever we get there.

2:47:57>> Uh, Commissioner Delvier,

2:47:58>> sorry, Commissioner Delvier, just one uh

2:48:01point sort of to uh Commissioner

2:48:03Jockaman's point and and I agree with

2:48:06what you're saying. The guidelines are a

2:48:08little confusing and I think that's

2:48:09where some of us are are having some

2:48:11issues making the findings. So, I guess

2:48:14then from like a process standpoint,

2:48:18because this is what we have, we're

2:48:20going to make a decision on that

2:48:22tonight. Okay. So, we're not gonna like

2:48:24ask the council.

2:48:25>> I'm not I'm not positioning for a

2:48:27continuence or anything [laughter] of

2:48:28that kind. I just

2:48:29>> I can hear two lawyers disagreeing and

2:48:33>> I just wanted to understand if we should

2:48:35consider that or we should consider

2:48:37what's before us right now. Perfect.

2:48:39Thank you.

2:48:39>> Good point. Thank you,

2:48:44>> Commissioner Ber. Yeah, I would just say

2:48:46uh we move forward, right? we're we're

2:48:47recommending and as I think um it was

2:48:50prefaced uh either way whatever the

2:48:53outcome it would go to council anyways.

2:48:55So you know I think giving them a a

2:48:57earnest conversation to build upon is

2:49:00one of the best things we can do.

2:49:02>> Yeah. So Commissioner Jockman I this

2:49:05will be my last point. I think um we've

2:49:07got the

2:49:10the Skyway that's before us. We've

2:49:12obviously heard concerns about the

2:49:13signage. Uh the signage isn't exactly

2:49:17what we're approving. What we're

2:49:18approving, as I read all these findings,

2:49:20is the skyway. Uh there's substantial

2:49:23benefit to pedestrian safety. This is

2:49:26documented in a number of research

2:49:28studies that uh reduce pedestrian

2:49:30fatalities with the construction. You

2:49:33can read about it on the CMF clearing

2:49:35house. This is all very well documented.

2:49:37Um that's a benefit to the public.

2:49:40That's there's no debate about that in

2:49:42terms of national research. So

2:49:45I see that as a benefit from the

2:49:48project. That's just not a specific

2:49:50thing that we make in these findings.

2:49:53Uh Commissioner Bisera.

2:49:55>> Yeah, thank you. And you know this is

2:49:57that blurriness, right? So it'll just

2:49:59probably be my last remark here is that

2:50:01uh and then equally from a planning

2:50:04perspective it's often encouraged to

2:50:07keep um uh pedestrian traffic kind of

2:50:12vibrancy right and walkability in the

2:50:15urban core and so forth. So where do we

2:50:18find that balance? So hopefully that's

2:50:20something that uh council can pick up

2:50:22and further discuss. And I would also uh

2:50:25again regardless of the outcome just

2:50:26implore council and stakeholders to to

2:50:30talk a bit more. It was discussed

2:50:32earlier or confirmed that, you know, our

2:50:34CBA is is consist of more elected folks

2:50:39uh by extension, you know, reporting to

2:50:41our our public. And so it would benefit

2:50:44uh more conversation there regardless of

2:50:48what we call it a sign or art or

2:50:50whatever to to unpack that conversation

2:50:53a bit more as well. Include public

2:50:54input.

2:50:57>> Commissioner McCoy.

2:50:59Thank you, Chair. Commissioner McCoy for

2:51:01the record. Just one final thought as

2:51:02this moves on to um city council. I

2:51:05would encourage the applicant um and

2:51:07staff as well to just, you know, we've

2:51:10had a lot of discussion tonight. I've

2:51:12heard what I would call argument.

2:51:15Um but I haven't seen a lot of evidence

2:51:17and and I'm not saying the evidence

2:51:19isn't there um to back up the arguments

2:51:21that were made, but I think it would be

2:51:22healthy and helpful for the council to

2:51:24have a record of evidence to support. We

2:51:28talked about peak times. We talk about

2:51:30soccer, you know, stay to play. How many

2:51:32stay play, you know, successful state of

2:51:34play soccer tournaments have we had? Um,

2:51:36you know, how frequently is that

2:51:37happening? Let's let's really identify

2:51:40the the benefit if we're talking about a

2:51:42benefit. Let's have the evidence instead

2:51:44of just the theory. I think that that

2:51:46would be beneficial, I think, to the

2:51:47council. Um, so that's just my final

2:51:49thought and I appreciate everyone's

2:51:50conversation tonight because I think I

2:51:52think our discussion is the most

2:51:54important piece here. Um, regardless of

2:51:56recommendation,

2:52:00Seeing no further hands raised, would

2:52:02anyone like to present a motion?

2:52:05>> Yep. Yes, chair. Get that up there. Uh,

2:52:09in the matter of case number

2:52:10LDC26-0000103

2:52:14based upon compliance with the

2:52:15applicable findings, I move to recommend

2:52:17that city council approve the

2:52:18conditional use permit subject to the

2:52:20conditions listed in the staff report

2:52:22with a modification to condition number

2:52:23two to extend the time frame to obtain a

2:52:26building permit from 18 months to 26

2:52:29months. Strike that. 36 months. and I

2:52:33can make all the findings.

2:52:38>> Commissioner Williams, second.

2:52:40>> We have a motion and a second. Any final

2:52:42discussion?

2:52:45>> Uh, seeing as though there are split

2:52:47opinions on this, Madame Clerk, would

2:52:49you please conduct a roll call vote?

2:52:50>> Sure thing, chair. Commissioner Belto,

2:52:53>> yes.

2:52:54>> Vice Chair Williams,

2:52:55>> yes.

2:52:56>> Commissioner Bisera,

2:52:58>> no.

2:52:59>> Commissioner Delvr,

2:53:01>> no. No, I cannot make the findings.

2:53:03>> Chair Jockman,

2:53:04>> yes.

2:53:06>> Commissioner McCoy,

2:53:07>> no.

2:53:08>> Commissioner McKenzie,

2:53:09>> yes.

2:53:11We are at 43. So, I believe the motion

2:53:14passes.

2:53:15>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. And with a split

2:53:17vote on a recommendation, do we provide

2:53:20uh the findings that are not made since

2:53:22this goes to city council? I'm looking

2:53:23to legal here.

2:53:28>> This is just a recommendation, so it's

2:53:30not appealable. So you don't need to

2:53:32make

2:53:33>> Thank you very [snorts] much

2:53:34>> those explicit.

2:53:35>> That concludes item

2:53:37I believe this was D4.

2:53:41>> Thank you. Uh we will now take a let's

2:53:45take an 11 minute break. We will

2:53:47reconvene at 9:00.

2:53:49Bathroom is up on the second floor if

2:53:51for those who need it.

3:04:29We process

3:04:40>> for everyone outside of chambers. We

3:04:43will now reconvene for the remainder of

3:04:45the agenda.

3:05:02Madame clerk, are you good to go?

3:05:05>> Yes, chair. Good to go.

3:05:09>> Okay, we will reconvene [snorts] uh with

3:05:11the remainder of our agenda for this

3:05:13next item. I will turn the speaking the

3:05:16the chair responsibility over to our

3:05:18vice chair, Commissioner Williams.

3:05:21And I understand that staff has a

3:05:22request to speak at the beginning of

3:05:24this item. Mr. Vice Chair.

3:05:26>> All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh

3:05:29we'll move on to D5, Boulevard, master

3:05:32plan, and zoning amendments, LDC

3:05:3426-000070.

3:05:36And I hear there we might be combining.

3:05:38So, Miss Knox.

3:05:38>> Sure. Mr. Vice Chair, staff would like

3:05:40to request that item D5 and D6 be open

3:05:43together. you will at the end if we are

3:05:45opening them together, they'll need to

3:05:46be two separate motions, but we want to

3:05:48be able to provide context from both

3:05:50pieces. So, we'd like to request that

3:05:51those be open together.

3:05:53>> Okay.

3:05:54Um,

3:05:56do we need to weigh in on this or make a

3:05:58vote or is this just your

3:05:59recommendation? We're going with it.

3:06:01>> Okay. Awesome. All right. Uh, okay. With

3:06:04that being said, we're going to open up

3:06:05D5 and D6. the Boulevard master plan

3:06:07zoning amendment which is D5

3:06:09LDC26-000070

3:06:12and D6 the Boulevard conditional use

3:06:15permit which is LDC26-000071

3:06:21um

3:06:24vice chair would you mind if we started

3:06:25with disclosures

3:06:27>> sure good call

3:06:30>> okay I'll get us going there

3:06:31>> uh uh Commissioner Alto um for the

3:06:33record I would like to make a disclosure

3:06:35concerning agenda item items D5 and D6.

3:06:38Uh my law firm represents an

3:06:39organization opposed to the project on

3:06:41issues similar to their concerns and

3:06:43opposition. As a result of that

3:06:45professional relationship, I have a

3:06:46commitment in a private capacity uh

3:06:48whose in to an organization whose

3:06:50interests may be affected by the

3:06:51commission's considerations of these

3:06:53matters. Given this relationship, I

3:06:55believe my independence of judgment the

3:06:57independence of judgment of a reasonable

3:06:58person in my position would be

3:07:00materially affected. Uh, accordingly, I

3:07:02will recuse myself from consideration of

3:07:04both these items and will not

3:07:05participate in discussion, deliberation,

3:07:07or a vote.

3:07:09>> Thank you, Mr. Belto. Uh, want to start

3:07:12with you, Mr. McCoy, next. Just go down

3:07:15the line.

3:07:15>> Sure. Commissioner McCoy, no

3:07:16disclosures. Um,

3:07:22uh, you know what? Let me pull that

3:07:23back.

3:07:25Commissioner McCoy, uh, I do want to

3:07:28disclose that approximately one year

3:07:29ago, I paid $108 for four refundable

3:07:33season ticket deposits to a as at the

3:07:36time unnamed professional soccer team in

3:07:38Reno. Uh, those deposits are still

3:07:40available to the general public at the

3:07:42same price. They're fully refundable.

3:07:44Um, I raised this with the city attorney

3:07:46before tonight's meeting. I don't

3:07:47believe these deposits create a conflict

3:07:49or affect my ability to consider these

3:07:51applications impartially.

3:07:53All

3:07:54right, Mr. McCoy. Thank you.

3:07:57>> Commissioner McKenzie, no disclosures.

3:08:00>> Uh, Commissioner Jockman, Mr. Vice

3:08:02Chair, and members of the commission.

3:08:03Madame Clerk, I'm disclosing that Kimley

3:08:06Horn is my employer and perform civil

3:08:08engineering on items D5 and D6. On this

3:08:11matter, I sought guidance from the city

3:08:12attorney's office. I have been advised

3:08:14that I have a PERS commitment in a

3:08:16private capacity to the interests of

3:08:18Kimley Horn under NRS281A.065.

3:08:21065

3:08:23section 4. I have also been advised that

3:08:25the independence of judgment of a

3:08:27reasonable person in my situation would

3:08:28be materially affected by my commitment

3:08:31in a private capacity to the interest of

3:08:33my employer. Accordingly, I will not be

3:08:36participating or voting on this item

3:08:38today. Uh both of these items today

3:08:40given that they are the last items. I

3:08:42will be leaving chambers on our agenda.

3:08:45Madame clerk, please lodge this

3:08:46disclosure on the record and I will step

3:08:49out of the room. Thank you.

3:08:52All right, Commissioner Williams, for

3:08:54mine. Uh, read and reviewed material and

3:08:56familiar with the area.

3:08:59>> Commissioner Delvr, I have a quick

3:09:01question about quorum for any of the

3:09:03items we are discussing.

3:09:05>> We still have quorum. Um, from legal

3:09:09master plan amendments require five

3:09:11members to vote and five to pass. So, we

3:09:14would need all members present to vote

3:09:16to approve if if this item were to be

3:09:19approved.

3:09:21Okay, thank you.

3:09:23>> I just wanted to make sure we had quum.

3:09:25Uh, Commissioner Delvr, no disclosures.

3:09:28>> Uh, Commissioner Bazer.

3:09:30>> Yeah, thank you. Uh, Commissioner Ber,

3:09:33uh, read and reviewed the material

3:09:34provided, read and reviewed public

3:09:36comments, including the helpful barber

3:09:38brief, and I'm familiar with this site

3:09:40as I grew up uh, 10 years around the

3:09:42corner from the project site on Neil

3:09:43Road.

3:09:47>> All right, that will wrap up

3:09:48disclosures. Um, and I guess we're

3:09:51starting with a staff presentation. Mr.

3:09:53Foster, please proceed.

3:09:56>> All right. So, I'm going to go from one

3:09:58presentation to the next. Um, and then

3:10:00we'll go from there. So, first one is,

3:10:03of course, the master plan and zoning

3:10:05map amendments. Project site is about

3:10:0727.95 acres in size, located on the east

3:10:10side of Akitzky Lane, north of East

3:10:12Peekom Lane, west of Interstate 580,

3:10:14about 875 ft south of East Moana Lane.

3:10:18Uh the project site is a uh combination

3:10:21of six parcels that were previously

3:10:23previous previously occupied by the

3:10:25former Jones West Ford dealership which

3:10:27was demolished earlier this year. That's

3:10:29in the northern portion of the site and

3:10:30an aging retail center constructed in

3:10:331974 that's in the southern portion of

3:10:35the site. The request before you is a

3:10:37master plan amendment to modify the

3:10:39gaming overlay exhibit established in

3:10:42the master plan and a zoning map

3:10:44amendment to expand the gaming overlay

3:10:46district, specifically the gaming

3:10:48overlay one convention center to include

3:10:50the additional 27.95 acres.

3:10:55As we [clears throat] zoom in here, and

3:10:57I know everyone knows, but for the

3:10:58record, the general development pattern

3:11:00in this area is commercial and

3:11:01residential in nature. Land uses

3:11:03immediately surrounding the site consist

3:11:05of retail uses to the north, west, and

3:11:08south, and multif family residential to

3:11:10the south, and east across East Peekom

3:11:13Lane and Interstate 580, respectively.

3:11:16The key issues that staff analyzed for

3:11:18purposes of the master plan amendment

3:11:19and zoning map amendment portion of this

3:11:22are compatibility of prop of the

3:11:24proposed expanded gaming overlay with

3:11:26the surrounding land use designations

3:11:28and development and provision of public

3:11:30uh utilities and services.

3:11:34So, um, again, the while the suburban

3:11:37while the master plan land use

3:11:39designation is suburban mixeduse, we're

3:11:40not contemplating changing that

3:11:43designation. We're simply looking at

3:11:45whether uh or not uh the the gaming

3:11:48overlay exhibit should be modified. So,

3:11:51if you look at the this is the exhibit

3:11:53in the master plan. Uh the blue areas

3:11:56are part of the gaming overlay. Um and

3:11:59that additional blue area uh where the

3:12:03project site is uh is what we're looking

3:12:05at in terms of modifying the master

3:12:07plan. There are 16 uh goals and policies

3:12:10on the screen that the project lines up

3:12:13with. Um recognize that approval of a

3:12:15master plan amendment is also subject to

3:12:17conformance review by the regional

3:12:19planning commission. Initial review by

3:12:21TMRPA did not identify any potential

3:12:24conformance issues, though they did

3:12:25request additional information related

3:12:27to the P project of regional

3:12:29significance thresholds and

3:12:31documentation regarding how the

3:12:32provision of public facilities and

3:12:34services will occur according to policy

3:12:36PF1. TMRPA staff subsequently reviewed

3:12:40additional information provided by the

3:12:42applicant and determined that the

3:12:44materials facilitate understanding of

3:12:45the proposal specific PRS thresholds and

3:12:48the provision of public facilities and

3:12:50services according to policy PF1. All of

3:12:53this information will be evaluated

3:12:55during the conformance review process in

3:12:57combination with the conditional use

3:12:59permit application requests.

3:13:03The zoning district is mixeduse urban

3:13:05and again we are not proposing or the

3:13:07applicant is not proposing a change to

3:13:08the zoning district itself. Uh rather

3:13:12the proposal is to expand the gaming

3:13:14overlay one convention center to include

3:13:17this site.

3:13:20Turning to compatibility with

3:13:21surrounding uses again the uses uh the

3:13:24surrounding uses are largely commercial

3:13:26though not exclusively. Uh you do have

3:13:29the Atlantis Casino Resort and the Reno

3:13:32Sparks and Convention Center across

3:13:33Kitsky Lane. Uh as indicated by the

3:13:36arrows, this area is part of a high

3:13:39activity commercial and visitor serving

3:13:41corridor along a principal arterial. Um

3:13:44I've highlighted Kitsky and Moana Lane

3:13:47here. The MF30 zoning is across the

3:13:50freeway. Um and it's approximately 250

3:13:54ft to the east. Um, and the apartments

3:13:57to the south are zoned mixeduse urban.

3:13:59They do not have a residential zone.

3:14:01Given all of the above, the proposed

3:14:03gaming overlay expansion is considered

3:14:05to be reasonably compatible with the

3:14:07surrounding land use designations and

3:14:09development.

3:14:11Here are the recommended findings for a

3:14:12master plan amendment and staff can make

3:14:15all recommended findings

3:14:17and the recommended findings for a

3:14:19zoning map amendment. Again, staff can

3:14:21make the recommended findings.

3:14:24Uh here is the recommended motion uh for

3:14:27the master plan amendment and uh again

3:14:30you would be referring this to council

3:14:33um and ultimately to the regional

3:14:34planning commission. So now we'll move

3:14:37to the cup.

3:14:40Okay. All right. So I'm not going to go

3:14:43through the whole dog and pony show

3:14:45about where the location is and

3:14:46everything again. Um I'm going to dive

3:14:48right into the requests. The requests

3:14:51before you are a conditional use permit

3:14:53for the following seven items. A 6,000

3:14:56seat sports arena and stadium. A 380

3:14:59room hotel with nonrest non-restricted

3:15:02gaming, otherwise known as a hotel

3:15:04casino. Amusement or recreation outside

3:15:07for uses associated with public plaza

3:15:09programming. Business operations between

3:15:1211 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Non-residential

3:15:14development within 300 ft of

3:15:16residentially zoned property. Flashing

3:15:18and animated signs not associated with

3:15:21the hotel casino and building height

3:15:23greater than 85 ft.

3:15:28All right. Okay. So, um,

3:15:32for all of those requests, the key

3:15:35issues that staff analyzed are the

3:15:37compatibility with surrounding uses,

3:15:39project design, proximity to the Reno

3:15:41Tahoe International Airport or RNO,

3:15:44noise, traffic access and circulation,

3:15:47and public utilities and services.

3:15:49Again, the master plan land use is

3:15:51suburban mixed use, and these are the

3:15:53same 16 goals and policies that are in

3:15:55support of the overall proposed request.

3:15:59Turning to compatibility with

3:16:01surrounding land uses. This is a

3:16:02different compatibility than I talked

3:16:04about in the previous presentation. This

3:16:06is the compatibility of the actual

3:16:08proposed use or combination of uses uh

3:16:11in comparison with the surrounding land

3:16:13uses.

3:16:15Again, the large the area is largely

3:16:17commercial with the Atlantis and the

3:16:19convention center. You have the high

3:16:20activity commercial and visitor serving

3:16:22corridor along a principal arterial. The

3:16:24MF30 is 250 ft and 350 ft to the east

3:16:29and separated by I580.

3:16:32The apartments to the south are across

3:16:34from the proposed parking in phase 2 and

3:16:37the uh that's that parking will be

3:16:40screened per code. The hotel and casino

3:16:43and stadium are strategically located to

3:16:45the north and the east near the freeway

3:16:48and are buffered by the parking garage

3:16:50and a future indoor water park in phase

3:16:53two.

3:16:54Outdoor recreation is limited uh sorry

3:16:57outdoor recreation lighting is limited

3:16:59by code and staff is recommending the

3:17:01standard con uh construction hours

3:17:04limitation in condition number six.

3:17:06Given all of the above, the proposed

3:17:08project is considered to be reasonably

3:17:10compatible with the surrounding land

3:17:12uses.

3:17:14The next several slides are on project

3:17:16design.

3:17:18Phase one includes a 6,000 seat sports

3:17:20arena and stadium, a 380 room hotel with

3:17:23non-restricted gaming, again a hotel

3:17:25casino, approximately 134,000 square ft

3:17:28of open air retail, and a restaurant

3:17:31village centered on the electric plaza,

3:17:33electric avenue plaza, a five-level

3:17:35parking garage with between

3:17:36approximately 1,025 and 145 parking

3:17:40spaces and associated surface and

3:17:42parking lot and site improvements. A

3:17:45future 150 room hotel tower and an

3:17:48indoor water park further to the south

3:17:50are contemplated in phase two and those

3:17:53are in the shaded gray area on the

3:17:55southern half of the site. Please

3:17:57recognize that phase one is

3:17:58self-contained and is intended to meet

3:18:00all parking access utility and code

3:18:03requirements without reliance on phase

3:18:05two which will be the subject of a

3:18:07future application as needed when the

3:18:09design is ready.

3:18:11turn into individual uh project elements

3:18:14in terms of project design. The stadium

3:18:16height is approximately 61 feet with

3:18:19light standards that are up to about 112

3:18:22ft.

3:18:24Hours of operation for stadium lighting

3:18:26are addressed by code which states that

3:18:27exterior lighting of recreation or

3:18:29entertainment events shall be turned off

3:18:31by 10 p.m. or no later than 1 hour after

3:18:34the end of the event, whichever is

3:18:35later.

3:18:37Regarding those 112 ft light standards,

3:18:39when paired with proper optics and

3:18:41cutoff designs, tall light standards

3:18:43result in fewer fixtures overall and

3:18:45substantially reduce spill compared with

3:18:47shorter poles since higher mounting

3:18:50heights allow each light to spread over

3:18:52a broader area.

3:18:54Code allows lighting for outdoor

3:18:55recreation and entertainment facilities

3:18:57to exceed code standards as necessary to

3:18:59achieve usual and customary lighting

3:19:02levels.

3:19:04the uh turning to the sixth floor hotel

3:19:06casino. Uh it's currently coming in at

3:19:0983 feet. It was previously shown at 92

3:19:11feet when the application was first

3:19:13submitted. And that's why there is a

3:19:15request for uh building height over 85

3:19:18ft in the mixeduse urban zone.

3:19:21Um given the centralized location of

3:19:24this particular building on the property

3:19:25surrounded by the tower sorry by the

3:19:27lower height stadium and parking garage

3:19:30any nominal additional height above a

3:19:33base of 85 in the mixeduse urban zone is

3:19:35considered to be appropriate for the use

3:19:37and the location. The next two items are

3:19:41compliance with the gaming overlay one

3:19:43convention center standards in code as

3:19:45well as compliance with the hotel with

3:19:47non-restricted non-restricted gaming

3:19:49standards in code.

3:19:52Uh preliminary evaluation of the

3:19:54application indicates that they meet

3:19:55both code sections. However, full

3:19:57compliance will be analyzed with the

3:20:00building permit submittals.

3:20:02Uh and then the last element I wanted to

3:20:04cover on this particular slide um is

3:20:06that only legally established

3:20:09non-restrict non-restricted gaming use

3:20:11is permitted to have unlimited signage

3:20:15including flashing and animated signs.

3:20:17Other on-site uses in this zone are

3:20:20subject to the mixeduse urban signage

3:20:22standards.

3:20:25This final slide on project design is

3:20:28devoted entirely to parking.

3:20:31The mixeduse non-event development

3:20:33portion of the overall project has a

3:20:36code requirement for approximately 1,500

3:20:39parking spaces. In phase 1, there are uh

3:20:431397 on-site spaces and an additional

3:20:47182 spaces available in the retail

3:20:50center parking lot that will remain in

3:20:53excessive code requirement for a grand

3:20:56total of approximately 1579 on-site

3:20:59spaces provided. Again, in phase one,

3:21:02most of those are in the parking garage

3:21:03in the center here. Condition 10

3:21:06requires the garage to be fully

3:21:08operational prior to issuance of the

3:21:09CFO, the certificate of occupancy for

3:21:12the hotel casino.

3:21:15A soldout stadium event scenario is

3:21:18estimated to require approximately 1,865

3:21:22spectator parking spaces plus 300

3:21:24employee spaces. shared use of the Reno

3:21:27Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority

3:21:29lot C with approximately 845 spaces and

3:21:33it's shown here across Kitsky Lane

3:21:35together with walkable off-site parking

3:21:37at the Atlantis and the Reno Sparks

3:21:39Convention Center is part of the event

3:21:41parking plan. Combined on-site and lot C

3:21:45supply supply is approximately 2424

3:21:48spaces compared to a total of 3,365

3:21:53spaces in a soldout event scenario

3:21:55resulting in a theoretical deficit of

3:21:58941 spaces or approximately 28% of the

3:22:02required parking. The parking demand

3:22:04study recommends a 28% reduction in the

3:22:07required parking due to increased

3:22:09utilization of taxi and ride sharing

3:22:11services i.e. Lift and Uber, other

3:22:14transportation modes including RTC bus

3:22:16service, the ease and accessibility of

3:22:19off-site parking, and the expectation

3:22:21that most events will not be sold out.

3:22:24Condition 11 also requires a dedicated

3:22:27ride share, taxi, and shuttle pickup,

3:22:29shuttle bus pickup, and drop off on-site

3:22:32location, which should help with the

3:22:34overall parking uh needs.

3:22:38The next topic that I'll turn to is

3:22:40proximity to the Reno Tahoe

3:22:41International Airport or RNO.

3:22:46Uh proximity to the west side of RNO may

3:22:49create some challenges to airport

3:22:51operations specifically related to

3:22:53potential airspace obstructions and

3:22:55navigational interference. From a

3:22:57federal regulation standpoint, the

3:22:59proposed project area lies underneath

3:23:01the Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77

3:23:04horizontal surface. All three of the

3:23:06major improvements, i.e. the stadium,

3:23:09the hotel casino, and the parking

3:23:10garage, require FAA notification as new

3:23:14permanent alterations, and that's

3:23:16memorialized in condition 12. Based on

3:23:19the height of the Atlantis, the Reno

3:23:20Tahoe airport authority does not expect

3:23:23major improvements, the major

3:23:24improvements to create uh obstruction or

3:23:27navigational issues. Crane operations

3:23:30during construction also require FAA

3:23:33notification. Depending on the height of

3:23:35the cranes, they may be temporarily they

3:23:38may be there may be sorry not they me

3:23:40they maybe there may be temporarily

3:23:44significant operational impacts on RNO

3:23:46aircraft. The RTAA requests that crane

3:23:50height be limited to the shortest

3:23:52possible cranes which is again

3:23:54memorialized in this timing condition

3:23:56number 13.

3:23:59Noise.

3:24:02Per code, noise levels shall not exceed

3:24:0449 dB at a residentially zoned property

3:24:07line between 1000 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and

3:24:09shall not exceed 65 dB during the day

3:24:12where existing ambient noise levels

3:24:14already exceed prescribed standards. Any

3:24:16new or modified noise source is

3:24:18prohibited from increasing existing an

3:24:21existing ambient noise levels.

3:24:24The predominant noise sources in this

3:24:26area are from vehicular traffic from

3:24:28I580 as well as surrounding streets, air

3:24:32traffic, and existing ambient

3:24:34environmental noise. Existing noise

3:24:36levels in the area are already elevated

3:24:39and nighttime levels substantially

3:24:42exceed code limits.

3:24:45by directing speakers inwards toward the

3:24:47interior of the stadium. That should

3:24:49minimize off-site noise propagation.

3:24:53Minor increases are predicted in noise

3:24:56levels ranging from approximately 8 to

3:24:593.7 dB at nearby receptors which based

3:25:03on FHWA standards range from not

3:25:06perceptible to barely perceptible. The

3:25:09modeled results do not represent a

3:25:12meaningful alteration of the existing

3:25:14noise environment.

3:25:18Staff has included conditions 14 and 15

3:25:21and 15 is updated which you'll see on

3:25:23the uh recommendation slide at the end.

3:25:26Um and you but you may ask why is staff

3:25:30recommending approval when the project

3:25:32addresses sorry adds noise levels that

3:25:35exceed code. recognized that the noise

3:25:38study includes uh included a a plan

3:25:42identifying the number, location, and

3:25:44orientation of stadium speakers intended

3:25:46to minimize noise impacts. However,

3:25:49noise levels can vary depending on

3:25:51several factors, including wind,

3:25:53temperature, humidity, atmospheric

3:25:55inversions, crowd size, and time of day.

3:25:58Because conditions can change and are

3:26:00not always predictable, conditions 14

3:26:03and 15 allow code enforcement to work

3:26:05with stadium operators to address

3:26:08potential noise complaints as they

3:26:10arise.

3:26:12Things that may that they may uh do

3:26:14include reducing the speaker volume,

3:26:17adjusting speaker orientation, or

3:26:19implementing other operational measures.

3:26:24The last topic uh is traffic access and

3:26:27circulation.

3:26:29The project is estimated to generate

3:26:31approximately 21,862

3:26:33average daily trips with 856 a.m. peak

3:26:37hour trips and 1,71

3:26:40p.m. peak hour trips. Study

3:26:42intersections are expected to operate at

3:26:44an overall level of service D or better

3:26:47for typical weekday operations which

3:26:50falls within policy thresholds. However,

3:26:53major stadium events are anticipated to

3:26:55generate volumes that would exceed

3:26:57policy level of service thresholds.

3:27:02Therefore, staff is recommending

3:27:03condition 7, which has also been

3:27:05updated, which you'll see here in a

3:27:06minute, that requires a stadium event

3:27:09management plan. This plan could include

3:27:11traffic management measures such as

3:27:13implementation of permanent adaptive

3:27:15traffic control devices, new closed

3:27:18circuit television cameras, alternate s

3:27:21signal timing plans and programs,

3:27:23shuttle bus service, staffed traffic

3:27:25control at key intersections, etc. The

3:27:28plan will also recommend stadium

3:27:30attendance thresholds to determine when

3:27:32traffic management measures are

3:27:34warranted.

3:27:36And lastly, conditions 18 and 19 are

3:27:38recommended to address uh access issues

3:27:41in to the site.

3:27:43You heard me talk about the PRS in the

3:27:46first presentation

3:27:48or the project of regional significance.

3:27:50Full buildout including phases one and

3:27:52two will result in triggering of

3:27:54multiple PRS thresholds. As you can see

3:27:57in the chart on the screen, traffic and

3:27:59sewage generation established PRS status

3:28:03under the Truckucky Meadows regional

3:28:04plan. The project is therefore subject

3:28:07to conformance review by the Truckucky

3:28:09Meadows Regional Planning Agency and

3:28:11Regional Planning Commission, which will

3:28:13happen at the same time as the review

3:28:14for the master plan amendment conform

3:28:16conformance.

3:28:18Here are the recommended findings for

3:28:20the conditional use permit and staff can

3:28:22make these recommended findings.

3:28:26And finally, the recommended motion.

3:28:27Again, as I alluded to earlier,

3:28:29conditions 15 and 17 have been modified

3:28:32or recommended to be modified by adding

3:28:35to the satisfaction of the administrator

3:28:37at the end of each. The point here being

3:28:39that we're not just asking for these

3:28:42studies or plans to be prepared and

3:28:44submitted, but they have to be reviewed

3:28:47and approved by the administrator. Um

3:28:50several of the other conditions in the

3:28:53uh 19 conditions of approval already

3:28:57have that kind of language. Um it was

3:29:00missing from these two conditions and

3:29:01and uh had no problem adding that.

3:29:05And that slide is for later should we

3:29:08need it. So that's it for my

3:29:09presentation. The applicants

3:29:11representative will now be making a

3:29:12presentation.

3:29:16>> Thank you Mr. Foster. Thank you.

3:29:24applicant presentation.

3:29:26>> Oh, okay. We're waiting for something.

3:29:29Okay.

3:29:38By the desert grit.

3:29:44We were never meant to be easily

3:29:46defined. Forged in desert heat, tempered

3:29:49by the desert grit,

3:29:53raised in the shadows of giants, [music]

3:29:54the Sierras standing tall, close enough

3:29:57to touch, too wild to ever tame.

3:30:01They guard us. They don't define [music]

3:30:04us. No single thing does. Ask 10 Neadans

3:30:08who we are. You'll get 10 different

3:30:10answers. Because we're not one story,

3:30:13we're all of them.

3:30:16We are miners still chasing [music] the

3:30:19precious metals that built us. We are

3:30:22ranchers and farmers who have been tied

3:30:24to this land for generations.

3:30:27Casinos and hospitality that never

3:30:30sleep. Technology and the future not yet

3:30:34invented. [music]

3:30:35We are moms, dads, daughters, and sons.

3:30:40We are one family.

3:30:43We call in sick on powder days. We're

3:30:46not sorry.

3:30:48We passionately fight to keep her blue.

3:30:52We catch, [music] we release, we come

3:30:55back for more.

3:30:57We share this land with creatures who

3:30:59boldly dance as if no one is watching.

3:31:02And those that clash along a shoreline.

3:31:07And every summer, this whole place turns

3:31:10into one long festival of rodeo, ribs,

3:31:13cars, and balloons. Because if there's

3:31:15one thing Reno agrees on, it's that we

3:31:18should be together.

3:31:21We don't have one thing that defines us.

3:31:25We have us.

3:31:27Reno belongs to everyone who chooses to

3:31:30call it home.

3:31:32The families who built it, the workers

3:31:34who keep it moving, the newcomers

3:31:37chasing possibility, the generations

3:31:40still to come. Different stories yet one

3:31:45city, one heartbeat,

3:31:48one community,

3:31:50one club.

3:31:53Called by the game that lives within

3:31:54each of us. We play not just for

3:31:57ourselves but for the past, present and

3:32:01future.

3:32:03This is our city.

3:32:06This is [music] our club.

3:32:09We are Reno City FC established in 2026

3:32:14and we're just getting started.

3:32:23So what you just saw I think is a

3:32:25reflection of the demand

3:32:28for professional soccer in Reno. Uh and

3:32:31what's true is that Reno always shows up

3:32:33for soccer uh when it was down at the

3:32:35ballpark.

3:32:38>> I will of course it's just later in this

3:32:40video.

3:32:41>> I know overwhelming. So I'm Doug

3:32:43Thornley with Holland and Hart on behalf

3:32:45of the applicant and with me today is

3:32:47the ownership group of Todd Davis and

3:32:49Bob Enzenberger and Dean Dilo and Wendy

3:32:52Debontani. Um I've brought a team of

3:32:54experts with me from Kim Lee Horn uh in

3:32:57Thomas Akert and Devin Moore and our

3:33:00architect Mark Sterns and they're all

3:33:02much smarter than I am and I'm sure

3:33:03they'll have plenty to say when when you

3:33:06get into your questions. Um, but like I

3:33:08saying, what you saw there is a

3:33:10reflection of the demand that's been

3:33:11building up since professional soccer

3:33:13left Reno. Um, [snorts]

3:33:16what we're asking for tonight is the

3:33:18ability to develop a site and a project

3:33:20that works the other 340 days out of the

3:33:23year, keeps that corner hopping, keeps

3:33:26people coming back for more, and

3:33:28supports a stadium that could not stand

3:33:31financially by itself, but no stadium

3:33:34can. We see that across the country. Um

3:33:37what we find out is that standalone

3:33:39stadiums tend not to work uh with

3:33:42respect to either being a great business

3:33:44proposition or being a site that is

3:33:47active often. Um what works much better

3:33:51and what you used to see in stadium

3:33:53development is a mixeduse district that

3:33:55surrounds that stadium and keeps people

3:33:57coming back. It gives them a reason to

3:33:58be there. They enjoy the game. They

3:34:00spend time in the restaurants. They

3:34:02spend time in the bars. They visit the

3:34:04hotel before after and it's a a site

3:34:07that's active all the time.

3:34:10Um I'm not going to take up all 15

3:34:13minutes because it's 9:30. Uh Jeff

3:34:16covered that. Um like we talked about,

3:34:19there is some nuance here. We're not

3:34:20changing the underlying master plan

3:34:22designation. We're not changing the

3:34:23underlying zoning. We're simply asking

3:34:25that the gaming um the gaming overlay be

3:34:30extended across Kitsky just that little

3:34:32bit from the Atlantis across Kitty

3:34:35Corner to the convention center so that

3:34:37we're not making a new visitor center.

3:34:40We're just complenting, we're finishing

3:34:42off an existing visitor cluster in South

3:34:45Reno.

3:34:50We covered the site plan. What I would

3:34:53point out for you is to the south of the

3:34:55field, the bottom of the screen, that's

3:34:56the parking garage, um up to the left,

3:35:01so to the west and u sort of the upper

3:35:06portion of that. Uh you have the

3:35:08convention center, the retail, um all

3:35:10the things that go into making it uh a

3:35:12positive experience for folks when they

3:35:14visit the site surrounded at the top,

3:35:16the back, and the bottom by the hotel.

3:35:19um that will be laid out in sort of a

3:35:21mezzanine fashion where you have a lot

3:35:22of activity on the ground floor. You

3:35:24have restaurants and bars on the second

3:35:26floor that looks down into that into

3:35:28that ground space and then you have

3:35:29hotel rooms that go up and towers on

3:35:31either side above it. Um below that to

3:35:34the south is the casino floor. It is

3:35:36subject to um both a certain minimum

3:35:40requirement and then certain maximum

3:35:42sizes based on its proximity to the

3:35:44convention center in the existing gaming

3:35:46overlay ordinance.

3:35:48We've covered those elevations. Uh the

3:35:50elevations that you saw in Jeff's

3:35:52presentation, the elevations that you'd

3:35:53see uh here if we spent time on it,

3:35:56those are the uh largely viewable

3:35:58elevations. So from Kitsky uh from the

3:36:01north, from the from the east, from the

3:36:02highway for the stadium. Um

3:36:05what you're seeing is is on the left,

3:36:08it's the field level. It's the operation

3:36:10site. You have a handful of seats. Um

3:36:12you have the back of house work. The

3:36:15concourse level is of course where most

3:36:16of those seats are. And I take this

3:36:18opportunity to tell you that 6,000 seats

3:36:20in this stadium is a that's an

3:36:22intentional choice that reflects only

3:36:24just slightly more than the average

3:36:25attendance at an 1864 game. Um so while

3:36:29we don't anticipate that these events

3:36:31will sell out and while we have already

3:36:33established tonight that vibes are

3:36:35important to the master plan but not a

3:36:37finding, um attending a game in this

3:36:39stadium should be uh a really positive

3:36:42experience for for most people who

3:36:44choose to attend. Um

3:36:48this is the ground floor. So this is

3:36:49what you would see if you were looking

3:36:50down from the mezzanine level um in the

3:36:53hotel and the convention center. It's

3:36:55largely um sort of a

3:36:59a multi-purpose space, but what you see

3:37:01are are tables um ideally for watching

3:37:04games of all sorts, not just games that

3:37:06are happening next door. Uh a place for

3:37:09people to gather, place for people to

3:37:11enjoy things. What we've really tried to

3:37:12do here, um, this is a stolen line, but

3:37:15we've tried to design a night out where

3:37:17you can come in, you can eat, you can

3:37:20celebrate, you can watch the game, and

3:37:22you can repeat that process as many

3:37:24times as you wish throughout the year.

3:37:27Level two uh, better illustrates the

3:37:29mezzanine concept that I was talking

3:37:31about before. You see that first floor

3:37:33uh, sort of opaqued out there, but um,

3:37:37it wraps around. there's an opportunity

3:37:39for seating and and viewing and

3:37:43gathering. Uh there are more restaurants

3:37:45on the second floor here.

3:37:48The casino floor plan is shown here only

3:37:50because uh there are certain

3:37:52requirements in the in the ordinance

3:37:54that governs the overlay and what needs

3:37:56to go into a casino floor of this

3:37:57proximity to the convention center.

3:38:00Parking garage is a parking garage. This

3:38:03is a redevelopment project as you can I

3:38:05mean I think everybody's familiar with

3:38:06the old Jones West Ford site. It was

3:38:07built in the 70s um and and closed and

3:38:10sat vacant for a couple of years. We

3:38:12demoed it earlier this year. I do think

3:38:14there is a nuance there too that we

3:38:16talked about earlier, right? I mean,

3:38:17we've established that soccer is good.

3:38:19We've established that that vibes aren't

3:38:21a finding. Um but two, we've talked

3:38:24about project finance and how that's

3:38:27impacted by entitlements. Uh here,

3:38:32a lot of projects that come before this

3:38:33board are entitled on an option. Um, in

3:38:36this case, the ownership group has put a

3:38:38significant amount of money into the

3:38:40dirt. They are locked in. Uh, a project

3:38:43of some magnitude does need to be

3:38:44developed on this site. Um, we think

3:38:47this is the right one. The re the reason

3:38:49we think this is the right one is that

3:38:52number one, we know there's a demand for

3:38:53soccer in Reno. Um, we heard that, you

3:38:56know, people here tonight have put down

3:38:58the refundable deposit on seats. Um,

3:39:01that's overwhelmingly true. In fact,

3:39:03there's a refundable deposit put down

3:39:04right now on a third of the seats in

3:39:06that stadium. Um,

3:39:09people want to experience professional

3:39:11soccer in Reno. It's just that a

3:39:14standalone stadium isn't a financially

3:39:16viable business prospect. So,

3:39:20what we see, like I said, across the

3:39:22country is that the mixeduse model

3:39:24surrounding the stadium with activity so

3:39:26that the site is active all year instead

3:39:29of the 17 home games that the soccer

3:39:31team will play. instead of the handful

3:39:33of concerts that will show up and and

3:39:36perform uh at this site. Um this keeps

3:39:39that corner Kitsky and Peekom active. It

3:39:43draws people in. And as Mr. Gordon said

3:39:45earlier, a rising tide will raise all

3:39:47boats. It will be great for the

3:39:48convention center. It will be great for

3:39:50the Atlantis. It will be great for the

3:39:51Peppermill. It will be great for the

3:39:53small businesses that do surround this

3:39:54site because it drives traffic. It

3:39:57drives interest. More people will come

3:39:58to the space.

3:40:02The project itself uh is about seven

3:40:05almost $8 million to the good over 20

3:40:08years. Um it does reflect a lot of the

3:40:12goals in the master plan. It reflects a

3:40:14lot of the goals in the redevelopment

3:40:16plan in the way that it is both infill

3:40:18development. Um so we're connecting

3:40:20spaces, but we're also making use of a

3:40:23vacant site now that is largely degraded

3:40:26in value. um because it is, you know,

3:40:29sort of [snorts] overgrown. We're doing

3:40:31our best with that. Um but prior to

3:40:33that, it was an old it was an old car

3:40:36sales place and and a diesel shop. Um

3:40:41I don't know that I can stress enough,

3:40:42so I'm going to say it for a third time.

3:40:44The yearround activity is what we're

3:40:46trying to solve for here tonight. Uh so

3:40:48Jeff told you the how, right? Jeff told

3:40:50you how we were going to entitle the

3:40:52project. It's my goal in our limited

3:40:54time to tell you why it needs to be

3:40:56entitled that way.

3:40:58Like I said, a third of the seats have a

3:41:00deposit on them. Um, I'd invite you to

3:41:03speak with John Doyle, who is in the

3:41:06back, and I didn't introduce him, which

3:41:08is horrifyingly embarrassing because he

3:41:10was a member of the men's national team

3:41:11and is actually in charge of soccer for

3:41:14the group. Um, but I would invite you to

3:41:16to ask John and to ask Wendy about the

3:41:18outreach they've done in the community

3:41:20and what their plans are to continue

3:41:22that outreach. Uh, and make soccer a

3:41:24more viable sport for the kids in this

3:41:27community to give them paths to more

3:41:29competitive soccer should they so

3:41:31choose. Um, to provide them with that

3:41:33basis of training and and those

3:41:35resources that exist in other

3:41:37communities but don't exist in this

3:41:38community today.

3:41:43Um, as Jeff highlighted for you with

3:41:46respect to parking, lighting,

3:41:47landscaping, drainage, and the

3:41:48utilities, um, we meet that code. We are

3:41:51using, uh, a parking demand study that

3:41:55was authored by Kimley Horn. The author

3:41:57of that study is in the audience. It's

3:41:58Mr. Moore. Um, I would ask you to

3:42:01inquire as to the methodology and the

3:42:04thought process behind that because a

3:42:06lot goes into determining how many

3:42:08parking spaces you need. And I I think

3:42:10as you all know there is no economic

3:42:12incentive to underpark a project. Uh and

3:42:14so you know parking is expensive to

3:42:17build uh particularly in a parking deck.

3:42:19And so it's very important that we get

3:42:21that number right because it you know

3:42:23directly impacts the experience people

3:42:25have when they visit the the site.

3:42:29Um again there is a little bit of nuance

3:42:32here today. It's a master plan amendment

3:42:33and it's a zone change, but we're not

3:42:35changing the master plan designation or

3:42:37the underlying zoning uh district. We

3:42:40are simply asking that the gaming

3:42:42overlay that exists across the street be

3:42:44extended to complete that visitor

3:42:46corridor uh to make this project

3:42:49something that's active year round.

3:42:51That's something that's a a draw to

3:42:53everyone in the community uh and that

3:42:55supports the vision of bringing

3:42:56professional soccer back to Reno.

3:43:00because staff can make the findings. I'm

3:43:02thrilled to stand here tonight and ask

3:43:04you for your approval um on the cups

3:43:07that you are the deciding body and on

3:43:09the master plan amendment and the zone

3:43:11change where you're the recommending

3:43:12body to the city council.

3:43:16City's ready. These guys are too. Thanks

3:43:20very much.

3:43:22>> All right. Thanks, Mr. Thornley. Uh that

3:43:25puts us into public comment. Uh Madame

3:43:27Clerk.

3:43:28>> Thank you, Vice Chair. We did receive

3:43:30correspondence for this item that were

3:43:32forwarded to the commission and entered

3:43:33into the record. I have a few requests

3:43:35to speak forms here. And then if you are

3:43:37online and would like to provide public

3:43:38comment, please raise your hand. If you

3:43:40are in person and did not sign up, but

3:43:42would like to provide comment, please

3:43:43fill out one of the green public comment

3:43:46cards out front. Um, I'm going to start.

3:43:48We have a couple public commenters who

3:43:50do not wish to speak. Um, Doug Brown

3:43:53does not wish to speak, but is in favor.

3:43:55Omar Madera Ruiz does not wish to speak

3:43:58but is in favor and Seth Dasus does not

3:44:02wish to speak but is in favor. With that

3:44:05we will start in person with Michael

3:44:08Brady followed by Mike Dudick I believe

3:44:12and Jackson Crawford.

3:44:15Go ahead and state your name for the

3:44:17record. You will have three minutes.

3:44:20>> Uh good evening committee. My name is

3:44:22Michael Brady, second generation member

3:44:24of Labour's Local 169 and proud member

3:44:27of the Pyramid Lake Pyute tribe. Uh,

3:44:29I'll be short and sweet. On behalf of

3:44:31Lyuna Local 169, we are formerly neutral

3:44:35with the Reno Pro soccer stadium uh,

3:44:38proposal in its current form. Thank you.

3:44:42>> Thank you, Michael.

3:44:45Next up is Mike Dudek followed by

3:44:48Jackson Crawford.

3:44:52Hi, my name is uh Mike Dudek. I want to

3:44:55thank you for the opportunity to speak

3:44:56tonight. Um I want to express my support

3:45:00for the Reno FC Stadium and the proposed

3:45:02development around it. What excites me

3:45:04most about this project isn't

3:45:07necessarily the soccer stadium itself.

3:45:09It's what the development could mean for

3:45:11our community in the future of Reno. I

3:45:14moved here in 2020 uh from New York.

3:45:17I've watched Reno continue to grow over

3:45:19the years that I've been here. We see

3:45:21new neighborhoods, new businesses, and a

3:45:23tremendous amount of development.

3:45:26But I also believe that as we continue

3:45:28to grow, we need to focus on is

3:45:30improving the revitalization of many

3:45:32areas that we have. And that's really

3:45:35what I see this project.

3:45:37We're talking about taking an older

3:45:39commercial property and transforming

3:45:41into something that could be new life to

3:45:43the whole surrounding area. Not just a

3:45:46soccer stadium, but restaurants,

3:45:48entertainment,

3:45:49businesses, and a destination that

3:45:52people can enjoy all throughout the

3:45:54year.

3:45:55I believe developments like this can

3:45:57create a ripple effect. When you invest

3:45:59in one area, it creates opportunities

3:46:01for surrounding businesses and

3:46:04encourages other investments

3:46:06and brings new energy to a neighborhood.

3:46:09But beyond the economic benefits, what

3:46:12really stands out to me is the community

3:46:14aspect. I think Reno needs more places

3:46:17that bring people together. Places where

3:46:20families can spend time, where friends

3:46:22can gather, and where our kids can grow

3:46:24up having experience in creating

3:46:25memories right here in their hometown.

3:46:30Having a professional soccer team gives

3:46:32our community something else to rally

3:46:34around and take pride in. And you don't

3:46:37have to be a soccer fan to appreciate

3:46:39the value in that.

3:46:41To me, there's a difference between

3:46:42city, a city that's simply growing and a

3:46:46city that's actually becoming a much

3:46:48better place to live. Growth brings much

3:46:51more people and more buildings. But

3:46:53projects that create gathering places,

3:46:56shared experiences, and a sense of

3:46:57community are what help make this city

3:47:00special.

3:47:02I also appreciate apprec appreciate the

3:47:05vision that the whole investment group

3:47:06and their team is bringing to Reno. Reno

3:47:09projects of this size take commitment

3:47:12and I believe believe we should

3:47:14encourage people who are willing to

3:47:15invest in our city and our and its

3:47:17future.

3:47:19Of course, any development needs to be

3:47:21thoughtfully planned, but I believe this

3:47:23is the type of opportunity we should

3:47:25embrace. At the end of the day, I don't

3:47:27look at this as simply building a soccer

3:47:29stadium. I look at it as an investment

3:47:32in revitalization, investment in our

3:47:34community, and most importantly, an

3:47:36investment in the future of Reno. I hope

3:47:39I hope you all support this, and I thank

3:47:41you for letting me take the time to

3:47:43speak.

3:47:45Thank you, Mike. Next up is Jackson

3:47:48Crawford,

3:47:50I believe,

3:47:53followed by Libby Bayister, followed by

3:47:56Graham Manasi.

3:48:00Yes, it is. Yeah. Go ahead.

3:48:03>> You don't I don't think

3:48:07>> legal. Um, since we combined two items,

3:48:10if someone signed up to sign, if someone

3:48:13signed up to provide public comment for

3:48:14both, are there two public comment

3:48:17periods available or just the one?

3:48:22Not that I would use it at all, but uh

3:48:28>> they can do two I mean

3:48:30>> Okay.

3:48:31>> two separate

3:48:32>> Yeah, I'll be quick

3:48:32>> items. So,

3:48:33>> okay. Um hello everyone. Jackson

3:48:36Crawford for the record. Um good evening

3:48:40uh chair and uh commissioners. My name

3:48:43is Jackson Crawford of Wobble Bond

3:48:44Dickinson appearing on behalf of Gator

3:48:47Kitsky. Uh owner of the commercial

3:48:49property located immediately north of

3:48:52the proposed project right about here.

3:48:55Um I'd like to first start by saying uh

3:48:57Gator is generally supportive of the

3:48:59project. Uh client recognizes the

3:49:02importance of reinvestment in the

3:49:04corridor and appreciates the value and

3:49:06thoughtful development um that

3:49:08everything can bring to the community.

3:49:10However, um you know, rather than to

3:49:13ensure um however, Gator is not here to

3:49:16oppose the project, but rather to ensure

3:49:17that the costs and impacts associated

3:49:20with the project are borne by the

3:49:21applicant and not by neighboring

3:49:23property owners who have long operated

3:49:25successful businesses in the area. Um

3:49:29so, Gator's request is straightforward.

3:49:32If this project moves forward, um there

3:49:34should be additional cons conditions and

3:49:37considerations uh primarily focused on

3:49:40two primary concerns which are traffic

3:49:42and sanitary sewer act uh availability.

3:49:47So first Gator has concerns regarding

3:49:49utilities and shared infrastructure. The

3:49:51proposed development contemplates a

3:49:52substantial increase to the intensity of

3:49:54the use on the site. I believe is stated

3:49:57around 479,000

3:50:00uh gallons per day.

3:50:02um of anticipated flow. So there is a

3:50:05sanitary sewer main that um traverses

3:50:08across these two property lines. So

3:50:10Gator just wants to ensure that the

3:50:11capacity will be maintained. Um second,

3:50:14so Gator requests that protection of the

3:50:16existing access, circulation and

3:50:18operational functionality of its

3:50:20business right here um is maintained.

3:50:23So, of course, this is a commercial

3:50:25property. With that comes traffic from

3:50:28customers, uh, trucks, delivery trucks.

3:50:31And what you can see back here in this

3:50:33corridor is, uh, the primary, uh, path

3:50:36where ingress and egress goes for, uh,

3:50:40delivery trucks. Uh, this will be

3:50:42impacted um due to the wall that will be

3:50:45created uh, or constructed from the

3:50:47applicant for this project. Uh so it'll

3:50:50be reduced approximately from a 54 wide

3:50:54ingress and ingress to about a 30 foot

3:50:56ingress and ingress. Um so you know

3:50:59Gator is generally in favor of this

3:51:01project. However, um if you see here on

3:51:03the bottom left corner, there are, you

3:51:05know, a couple couple me um islands

3:51:08there or med medians in that parking

3:51:09area um which which may ultimately need

3:51:13to be uh revised or removed um uh in

3:51:16order to accommodate for that um change

3:51:20in truck circulation or flow um in order

3:51:23to service these uh tenants. So, uh,

3:51:27also there's a, um, dumpster dumpster

3:51:31pad over there that may also need to be

3:51:32relocated. So, you know, of course,

3:51:34Gator's in favor of the project.

3:51:36However, um, the cost for any site

3:51:38development or any plan changes um

3:51:42should not be born entirely on Gator. uh

3:51:44and Gator is somewhat requesting a

3:51:46condition um of approval of course for

3:51:49the CUP that uh you know any approval of

3:51:53the projects also conditioned on uh the

3:51:56potential approval uh that any

3:51:59reasonable modifications to this ingress

3:52:02and egress path uh be approved as a you

3:52:05know minor site plan review rather than

3:52:08necessitate um developmentwide or

3:52:11projectwide uh upgrades to bring up to

3:52:14code compliance because this is an older

3:52:16site. Um

3:52:19so uh you know Gator believes this is a

3:52:22reasonably narrowly tailored request uh

3:52:24for an additional condition and then you

3:52:27know again Gator supports responsible

3:52:29development generally supports the

3:52:30development just does not want to uh

3:52:33bear any of the costs required for this

3:52:34development that it's not advancing uh

3:52:37directly. So lastly thank you for your

3:52:39time and consideration. Uh we appreciate

3:52:42the uh commission's um thoughts and

3:52:44efforts into this uh development and

3:52:46also uh for spending the time here

3:52:48tonight. Thank you.

3:52:50>> Thank you. Next up is Libby followed by

3:52:54Graham Manasi followed by Bri Casper.

3:53:02>> Uh good evening. My name is Libby

3:53:04Balisteros.

3:53:05Uh I am currently in opposition of the

3:53:09project. I live in the surrounding

3:53:11neighborhood in the 89502 area. Uh I

3:53:14just haven't had enough like detail or

3:53:17specification on noise level and how the

3:53:19like height would affect the sunlight in

3:53:22our neighborhood as well. Um as well as

3:53:24the traffic and just like I haven't

3:53:28really seen like a thought out plan.

3:53:31There is talk about you know more

3:53:33details on that but just currently I

3:53:35don't

3:53:37see like infrastructure

3:53:39markings for that as well as it kind of

3:53:42would take away the grocery outlet by

3:53:44our house um which is an 8 to 10 minute

3:53:47walking distance um which does help us

3:53:49save money on like gas and getting

3:53:51groceries. The other grocery store

3:53:53closest to us would be like Walmart,

3:53:55which is a um

3:53:5824 minute walk or a seven minute drive.

3:54:02But even with like the traffic of the

3:54:04current well not current but future um

3:54:08expected

3:54:10um flow from the project. I I'm just

3:54:14concerned about that. Um also I as I

3:54:17understand it it is going to increase

3:54:19property value which is really good for

3:54:20like homeowners but as for renters that

3:54:23would increase the rent as well. Um even

3:54:27considering homeowners under HOAs um

3:54:30they might have to pay more fees just

3:54:32because the property value increased in

3:54:35that aspect. Um but overall if these

3:54:39things are addressed I I don't really

3:54:41have a problem with it. Um, but yeah, at

3:54:43the moment it's a no for me. Thank you.

3:54:46>> Thank you.

3:54:48>> Thank you. Graham is next, followed by

3:54:50Brie Casper.

3:55:00Good evening. My name is Graeme Manasse.

3:55:03I'm I'm here tonight to support the

3:55:05development of the new stadium for Reno

3:55:07City FC and the surrounding

3:55:09entertainment district. Uh, as someone

3:55:12who's originally from the United

3:55:13Kingdom, uh, and a lifelong supporter of

3:55:16Chelsea, I've have admit I have calling

3:55:18it soccer feels a little, uh, little

3:55:20unnatural. So, you'll have to forgive me

3:55:22if I accidentally call it football

3:55:24tonight. Um, but whatever we call the

3:55:27game, I believe the opportunity for Reno

3:55:29is much bigger than what happens on the

3:55:31field. Um the stadium can become an

3:55:35anchor for the entire entertainment

3:55:37district with restaurants, hotels,

3:55:39retail, concerts, communities, and local

3:55:42business. The economic uh benefit

3:55:45shouldn't simply be measured on what

3:55:47happens inside a stadium on game day.

3:55:50Visitors eat at restaurants, visitors

3:55:52stay at hotels, they visit bars and

3:55:54shops, and people coming from outside

3:55:57our area are bringing additional

3:55:58spending to our local economy. The

3:56:01successful entertainment district can

3:56:03encourage private investment, support

3:56:05local businesses, create jobs, give

3:56:08people another reason to spend their

3:56:10entertainment dollars in Northern

3:56:11Nevada.

3:56:13The SP the stadium may be an anchor, but

3:56:15the entertainment district is going to

3:56:17be the economic engine of this uh this

3:56:19project. Um, you may or may not have

3:56:22seen a TV series called Welcome to

3:56:24Rexom, um, on FX where Ryan Reynolds and

3:56:28Bob Malini invested in an Rexum FC. But

3:56:31not only did they change a club, they

3:56:33changed an entire city and in um,

3:56:37businesses came back that were dying.

3:56:39And this, I believe, will happen 10fold

3:56:42here in Reno. It becomes part of the

3:56:44city's identity and helps the city's

3:56:46story. And of course, we all remember

3:56:49the World Cup this year. 6 billion

3:56:51people watched it worldwide. 68 million

3:56:55people in the United States. So you have

3:56:58to consider whether you call it soccer

3:57:00or football, this is truly a world game.

3:57:03And the enthusiasm

3:57:05it represents is our community. Reno

3:57:08should be positioned to benefit from

3:57:10what enthusiasm rather than just sitting

3:57:13watching it on the TV. Reno City gives

3:57:16us an opportunity to turn some

3:57:17entertainment into an exciting local

3:57:20hometown club, hometown stadium, and the

3:57:23reason to spend those entertainment

3:57:25dollars right here in our community.

3:57:27There's another benefit that's harder to

3:57:29put on the balance sheet. Children

3:57:31playing soccer in in Reno or Sparks

3:57:33should be able to sit in the stands and

3:57:35watch their professional players in

3:57:37their hometown wearing their team shirt

3:57:39and imagine themselves playing on that

3:57:41field one day. Families should have the

3:57:44team they can call their own. Businesses

3:57:47have a team that they can support. And

3:57:49our community should have another reason

3:57:51to come together. So, in closing, what

3:57:54can a soccer stadium do for Reno? The

3:57:56bigger question is, what can an entire

3:57:59sports and entertainment district do for

3:58:00Reno? There's an opportunity to support

3:58:03local businesses, encourage private

3:58:05investment, attract visitors, and create

3:58:08an entertainment destination. We're not

3:58:11simply talking about building a soccer

3:58:13stadium. We're talking about using

3:58:14professional soccer as an anchor for

3:58:17economic development and creating a

3:58:19destination that can contribute to the

3:58:21the future of Reno. I encourage this

3:58:25council to uh uh support this uh

3:58:29endeavor and initiative.

3:58:31Um so, thank you for your time, ladies

3:58:34and gentlemen.

3:58:35>> Thank you.

3:58:36>> Thank you. Next up is Bri Casper

3:58:38followed by Mark Kersinman.

3:58:44>> Hi council members. I came here to ask

3:58:46you something completely different which

3:58:48will happen at the end of this entire

3:58:50meeting. But I just watched that

3:58:51presentation and couldn't help myself

3:58:53but speak on it. Um the main focus that

3:58:57I noticed is the talk of land use,

3:58:59right? And that's not just the zoning,

3:59:02that's not the abbreviation that goes

3:59:04with the property. It's the full

3:59:06spectrum of what you got to listen to

3:59:08today and what you get to approve if you

3:59:10approve the cup. But realistically, what

3:59:13I heard was that there it's too tight

3:59:17around the Atlantis with the existing

3:59:19infrastructure and that it's going to

3:59:21create a massive amount of traffic and

3:59:24congestion and that doesn't drive

3:59:26traffic to the area. In fact, that would

3:59:28deter people from being in that area if

3:59:31they know that they're going to face

3:59:33congestion and um you know, traffic

3:59:37being around there. I remember, you

3:59:38know, just trying to go to Jo-Ann's when

3:59:40it used to be in that area and how hard

3:59:42that is to turn left on Kitsky. So, I

3:59:45would just like to point out that um

3:59:46adding something that has 6,000 stadium

3:59:50seats and 380 hotel and gaming and

3:59:54amusement, I don't feel like this

3:59:56there's enough space for all of what was

3:59:58presented. I'd also like to point out

4:00:00the 28 percentage short on parking

4:00:03needed. I saw a 1300 required parking

4:00:06spots. Again, I'd like to point out that

4:00:08there was 6,000 seat sports arena. How

4:00:10are all those people at just the arena

4:00:12supposed to fit into the parking that

4:00:14was proposed? Also, the proximity to the

4:00:17airport could be an issue. That's

4:00:19something that should be heightened on

4:00:22our uh focus. And then the noise is

4:00:24already over the master plan

4:00:26requirements. So then they start talking

4:00:28about changing the angle of a speaker.

4:00:30It's like, no, I'm sorry. If it's above

4:00:32the master plan, we don't talk about

4:00:35putting a stadium in that area. We talk

4:00:38about what we can do to decrease the

4:00:40amount of sound in that area. No amount

4:00:43of angling speakers is going to do

4:00:45anything there. And they want code

4:00:47enforcement to deal with that after the

4:00:49fact. That just seems like you're adding

4:00:51more insult to injury. We have an

4:00:53exceeding budget. We have three people

4:00:55in code enforcement that are already

4:00:57overworked. This doesn't seem like a

4:00:59wise plan to accept. Um, and I'd like to

4:01:03also point out, you know, the greater

4:01:04Nevada field. It was a great idea. We

4:01:08all love sports. I would love to see a

4:01:10soccer field somewhere in here, but

4:01:12they're facing severe financial pressure

4:01:14and public funding challenges. So, let's

4:01:16just be smart about this and maybe put

4:01:18this in a place that would be able to

4:01:21handle the amount of growth that they're

4:01:22talking about so that we can all enjoy

4:01:25watching uh sports, including soccer in

4:01:28our beautiful Nevada area. Thank you so

4:01:30much.

4:01:34>> Next up is Mark

4:01:40Thank you commissioners for hearing my

4:01:41public comment. My name is Mark

4:01:43Kersinman.

4:01:45[clears throat]

4:01:45I think soccer is a great sport. I think

4:01:48soccer events are wonderful. I don't

4:01:51think I can even imagine what kind of

4:01:52traffic nightmare this will create in

4:01:54that area. If you ever tried to take

4:01:57Moana Lane to the freeway when an event

4:02:00is getting out of the Reno Convention

4:02:02Center, you will know what kind of

4:02:05gridlock is already there. And I just

4:02:08think that this this stadium, I mean, I

4:02:11don't think I can even fathom what it's

4:02:13going to do to that area when an event's

4:02:14trying to get out. I mean, 6,000 seats,

4:02:17it I sat I sat through three lights just

4:02:20to get through Moana and Kitsky to get

4:02:22to the freeway. And like I said, that's

4:02:24just an event at the Reno Convention

4:02:26Center. So if two of these things are

4:02:28going on at the same time, it's going to

4:02:30be terrible. And that's that's my

4:02:33comment and that's all I need. Just want

4:02:35to say thank you.

4:02:39>> With that, I do not have any additional

4:02:41public comment in person and we do not

4:02:44have anyone on Zoom with their hand

4:02:45raised.

4:02:48>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh I think

4:02:49procedurally there were two or three um

4:02:53public commenters that weren't aware of

4:02:55the extra time. So I'd like to give

4:02:57those before uh we were told that you

4:03:00could do two three minutes. Those was

4:03:03there two or three. Madam clerk, do you

4:03:05remember there was two? Those two an

4:03:06opportunity to come back up if they felt

4:03:09um they wanted some more time.

4:03:13>> I'm good.

4:03:14>> You're good.

4:03:15>> Yeah.

4:03:15>> Okay. Just want to make sure. Lots of

4:03:17big project, lots of procedures. I just

4:03:19want to make sure we're all good. Okay.

4:03:21Um Okay. If uh we're all done with

4:03:24public comments, we will close that and

4:03:27uh move on to questions from the

4:03:28commission.

4:03:30Who's who'd like to start? Mr. McCoy.

4:03:33Commissioner.

4:03:34>> Thank you, Chair. Commissioner McCoy for

4:03:35the record. I do have questions kind of

4:03:37I know we've combined them, but I I

4:03:39prepared tonight to have questions on on

4:03:41uh each separate um process. Um I I do

4:03:44believe that if [clears throat] we

4:03:46approve the um gaming overlay um that

4:03:50that would continue regardless of what

4:03:52happens with the other one. Correct. So

4:03:53they're not jointly. Okay. So I'm going

4:03:55to just kind of ask my question. This

4:03:56will be for staff. Um Mr. Foster, I'll

4:03:59just kind of focus on the the gaming

4:04:01overlay first. Um the proposal is to

4:04:04change the map for almost 28 acres um uh

4:04:08to uh expand the gaming overlay. This

4:04:10isn't this particular ask is not you

4:04:14know for the the stadium necessarily

4:04:16like the gaming overlay would survive if

4:04:18a if a stadium is not built there.

4:04:19Correct.

4:04:20>> Correct.

4:04:21>> Okay. So um from staff's perspective

4:04:24what makes expanding the gaming overlay

4:04:26at this location a good land use

4:04:29decision on its own?

4:04:31>> So I think the the the main thing would

4:04:33be that it it's essentially contiguous

4:04:35with the rest of the overlay. if you can

4:04:37pull up my presentation. The first one,

4:04:39the master plan amendment one. Um,

4:04:43right. So, the the blue areas represent

4:04:46the existing uh gaming overlay there,

4:04:49uh, where the Atlantis is. Um, and it it

4:04:54again, it's yes, it's not exactly

4:04:56contiguous, but it's it's in the

4:04:58ballpark. It's in the same area, right?

4:05:00Um so that combined with the fact that

4:05:03this is an overall urban area um where

4:05:07these kinds of things happen either in

4:05:09the downtown or obviously at some point

4:05:12in the past the the city's u decision

4:05:16makers decided it was wise to have a

4:05:19separate gaming overlay specific to the

4:05:22convention center area um including the

4:05:25Atlanta. So it it's it's essentially

4:05:28it's all right there. this isn't in the

4:05:30middle of somewhere, you know, in South

4:05:32Reno or, you know, kind of on its own.

4:05:34It's just becomes part of a a bigger

4:05:37area. So, that's really what it boiled

4:05:39down to.

4:05:40>> Okay. Thank you. Um I thought I heard

4:05:43you say that use of the Atlantis parking

4:05:46lot is going to be part of the plan to

4:05:49address um some of the parking issues.

4:05:52Has that been kind of relayed or, you

4:05:55know, agreed to by the Atlantis? Has

4:05:56anybody reached out to

4:05:57>> I don't think I said the Atlantis. I

4:05:59said the um the convention center area.

4:06:02Yeah. But not not specifically the

4:06:04Atlantis.

4:06:04>> Um I don't believe there's any specific

4:06:06agreement with the Atlantis. No. So

4:06:08>> Okay.

4:06:09>> All right. Well, I apologize if I if I

4:06:11misheard you, Jeff. Um I think I'll I'll

4:06:14leave that for the gaming overlay for

4:06:15now and see if anybody else has any

4:06:17thoughts and come back around.

4:06:21>> All right. Commissioner McKenzie,

4:06:24>> just to follow up on that question, is

4:06:26there an agreement with the convention

4:06:28center? What if two major events are

4:06:29happening in the same day?

4:06:31>> So, we're starting to to weigh in or uh

4:06:35shift over to the conditional use permit

4:06:37portion of the discussion, which I don't

4:06:39mind, but I just want to make sure that

4:06:41we're tracking, right? That

4:06:43>> [snorts]

4:06:43>> uh because now we're getting into the

4:06:44actual nuts and bolts of of parking,

4:06:46right? Um so, having said that, um the

4:06:50uh there is an agreement in principle.

4:06:53It has not been executed yet. Um, but

4:06:55I've seen the legal document myself. Um,

4:06:58and uh, it hasn't been executed yet

4:07:01because there is not an entitlement.

4:07:03We've kind of had this conversation

4:07:04earlier tonight. Um, so there's not an

4:07:06entitlement yet that that that they

4:07:08wanted to tie themselves to yet. But the

4:07:10the 845 spaces and the and the legal

4:07:12document actually says 856, but

4:07:15somewhere in that range uh, of parking

4:07:18spaces are available in lot C directly

4:07:21across Kitsky Lane. Um and so that

4:07:25parking would be formally available for

4:07:29uh bigger events at the the the project

4:07:32site. Um

4:07:35more loosely speaking, parking at the

4:07:37convention center in general would also

4:07:40be available if there aren't competing

4:07:43events. Right. the what I'm told and and

4:07:47um Doug can probably get up and speak to

4:07:49this further is that um they will not

4:07:53schedule competing events. So whether

4:07:55it's a soccer game 17 times per year

4:07:58apparently and a handful of concerts or

4:08:00whatever those bigger events are, those

4:08:02those 6,000 seat events, th those will

4:08:06not be scheduled at the same time as

4:08:08there is a major event at the convention

4:08:10center so as to not uh overrun the

4:08:13parking situation.

4:08:20>> You good for now? Okay, Chris.

4:08:24>> Okay,

4:08:24>> Commissioner Delvier and Commissioner

4:08:26Ber,

4:08:27>> just to follow up on that, Jeff, if I

4:08:30might, h how does that get coordinated

4:08:34if like we are we just looking at

4:08:36calendars or are you then who is going

4:08:40to look at that to make sure that

4:08:41>> Yeah, great question. Um, I think the

4:08:44the mechanics are there in terms of the

4:08:45the the agreements for which RSCBA uh

4:08:50sorry for the project to use the RSCVA

4:08:53parking lot, those 845 or 856 spaces.

4:08:58>> Um, [snorts] as to you know, is someone

4:09:00going to have a master calendar or

4:09:01whatnot? Maybe Doug can can speak to

4:09:04that.

4:09:04>> Okay, great. Thank you.

4:09:05>> Yeah,

4:09:07>> thank you for the question, Commissioner

4:09:08DVR. Um, yeah, in general, the way

4:09:11conventions are scheduled is they're

4:09:12usually multi-year contracts,

4:09:14particularly the larger ones. And so we

4:09:16know well in advance when they're going

4:09:17to be. Uh but the lines of communication

4:09:19with Mike Ergetta and his at the RSCVA

4:09:21would be such that um not only do we

4:09:24know what those events are well in

4:09:26advance uh for the for those larger

4:09:29conventions, but when there's a special

4:09:30event or when there's something that's

4:09:32going to take up a lot of space at the

4:09:33RSCVA, uh we would know and we would

4:09:36have that conversation and we wouldn't

4:09:37schedule over it and they wouldn't

4:09:38schedule over us once those calendars go

4:09:40down for the year.

4:09:41>> Perfect. I mean, it only benefits both

4:09:42of you. So it makes I have some more I

4:09:44have some questions for you. So you can

4:09:45you can stay you can stay up there if

4:09:46you don't mind. Um what I have some

4:09:49questions also for Kimley Horn about

4:09:51traffic which we can talk about in a

4:09:53second. Um but one of the questions I

4:09:56have and maybe maybe it's for Jeff. I'm

4:09:58not sure yet. Um I understand that the

4:10:01FAA did review but I think the light

4:10:06standard height increased and no. So

4:10:09they so the 112 was what the FAA

4:10:13reviewed and is okay with.

4:10:16>> Right. So um I I don't want to

4:10:19misconstrue that that they have given

4:10:21approval on on anything.

4:10:22>> Understood that. Um uh the application

4:10:26package was submitted to uh the Reno

4:10:29Tahoe Airport Authority and they

4:10:32reviewed it um in concept in relation to

4:10:37runway [clears throat] 826 or something

4:10:39like that. I don't remember. I didn't

4:10:40put that stuff in the staff report. Too

4:10:42granular. Got it.

4:10:43>> But um the it's clearly in the the

4:10:47sphere of influence, shall we call it,

4:10:48right? in terms of

4:10:50>> you know the the far part 77 horizontal

4:10:53surface and

4:10:55>> yada yada yada but they expressed that

4:10:58because the Atlantis is right there also

4:11:01>> right and the Atlantis is substantially

4:11:03taller

4:11:05>> um that it should not be an issue.

4:11:08Nevertheless, there is a procedural

4:11:10process that the applicant will need to

4:11:13go through to submit and make sure all

4:11:16the tees are crossed and all the eyes

4:11:17are dotted,

4:11:18>> right?

4:11:18>> Um with regard to the structures, the

4:11:21lighting, etc. as well as the cranes.

4:11:24So, in this [snorts] actually this same

4:11:25process was put on the um Grand Sierra

4:11:29Arena.

4:11:29>> Sure.

4:11:30>> They had to go through that same

4:11:31process, submit the documentation, go

4:11:33back and forth, make sure all the tees

4:11:35were crossed and all the eyes were

4:11:36dotted. Um uh and so that same condition

4:11:39of approval or similar condition of

4:11:41approval was put on that project for the

4:11:43same reason.

4:11:44>> And and sorry, is that the FAA or is

4:11:45that Reno Tahoe?

4:11:48>> It's it's the AR it's the FAA. It's the

4:11:51process is with the FAA. Okay. But the

4:11:53Reno Tahoe airport authority is kind of

4:11:55who let's say manages the process

4:11:59initially anyway.

4:12:00>> Okay. Got it. Um and then I have um this

4:12:03is probably for for Jeff for you. Um, we

4:12:07get questions about the decibb and noise

4:12:09levels a lot. Um, and we've talked about

4:12:12like do we start looking at bass versus

4:12:14decibb etc etc. Not applicable here. But

4:12:16the question I have is um and to some of

4:12:19the public comments and public comments

4:12:21we received online uh if we're already

4:12:24exceeding

4:12:25that noise level and is that from

4:12:28traffic the flames at the Atlantis

4:12:31airplanes like what what exactly is

4:12:33causing this

4:12:35to to exceed at the moment and then why

4:12:37would we

4:12:38>> pull up the conditional use permit

4:12:39presentation please?

4:12:42>> So

4:12:42>> continue to add on to that.

4:12:44>> Yeah. So the the the noise environment

4:12:47um here let's get here here the noise

4:12:49[snorts] environment as the very first

4:12:51bullet says the predominant noise

4:12:53sources are of course I580 and that's

4:12:55going to be I would imagine the noise

4:12:56consultant is here somewhere but the the

4:12:59predominant noise source is going to be

4:13:01I580 right um along with the airport um

4:13:05of course surrounding streets uh you

4:13:07know uh you know lower ground lower down

4:13:10um and then just kind of general

4:13:12existing ambient noise Um they're

4:13:16they're very the the the noise study is

4:13:18very clear that the existing levels as

4:13:22measured um in the area are in

4:13:26exceedence of the allowed 49 dB during

4:13:29the night and 65 during the day. Okay.

4:13:32So the the the the baseline is that it's

4:13:36already noisy out there and when the

4:13:39code the code says you're not allowed to

4:13:41exceed when it's already past the the

4:13:45the the level that's allowed in code,

4:13:47right? Um, and so

4:13:51the the the question is, as I as I

4:13:54phrased in my in my presentation, well

4:13:56then how can staff possibly recommend if

4:13:59the code says thou shalt not exceed, you

4:14:01know, add to the existing noise

4:14:03environment when it's already louder?

4:14:05And the the reason that staff feels

4:14:08comfortable in making the recommendation

4:14:10to move forward with the process is

4:14:13because uh we recognize that it already

4:14:16is loud out there. The noise study says

4:14:20the8 del to 3.7 decel increase is not

4:14:26perceptible to barely perceptible. So

4:14:29while it's an increase,

4:14:32essentially no one would know it, okay,

4:14:34is what it's saying. And and when I say

4:14:36no one, I mean the sensitive receptors

4:14:38on the east side of the freeway there,

4:14:40right? Um and again, the consultant may

4:14:43want to speak to this more with more

4:14:45precision, but from from my perspective,

4:14:47from staff's perspective, um the you you

4:14:51wouldn't know it because you can't

4:14:54discern that level of increase. And so

4:14:57as a result, the the last bullet before

4:15:00the conditions 14 and 15 says the

4:15:02modeled results do not represent a

4:15:04meaningful alteration of the existing

4:15:06noise environment. In other words, we're

4:15:08not going from something that's quiet to

4:15:10something that's loud, right? We're

4:15:11going from something that's loud to a

4:15:14little bit more, but you can't tell.

4:15:16>> Have you heard soccer fans before, Jeff?

4:15:19[laughter]

4:15:19>> Yeah. Yeah. Hooligans, right? Um, so the

4:15:24the the the the second half of that

4:15:27equation from from our perspective is

4:15:30also what I spent my whole, you know,

4:15:32kind of soapbox minute there uh during

4:15:34the presentation in terms of this is

4:15:36just a model, right? We don't really

4:15:39know until something is out there

4:15:42putting it to the test and uh there may

4:15:46be days where it's not 3.7, maybe it's

4:15:49louder and there may be days where it's

4:15:50less than that, right? just based on

4:15:52atmospheric conditions and everything

4:15:53else, but with the conditions of

4:15:56approval that allow us to basically say,

4:15:59look, um, there we're getting noise

4:16:02complaints and therefore we want to make

4:16:06sure that we don't have those

4:16:08complaints. We want to look out for, you

4:16:10know, the population and we're going to

4:16:13basically tell you you have to do

4:16:14something else. You have to do more. Um,

4:16:17and that's what those conditions of

4:16:18approval, that's what that whole kind of

4:16:21uh setup is intended to achieve.

4:16:23>> Perfect. Thank you. I have more

4:16:25questions again around traffic, but I'll

4:16:27yield for now.

4:16:28>> All right. Uh, Commissioner Bera.

4:16:31>> Uh, great. Thank you so much. Uh, hey

4:16:33everyone. Uh, thanks for being with us

4:16:36this evening. Um, just to kind of, uh,

4:16:39kick things off with regards to to

4:16:42residents. Um just for clarity, was this

4:16:44project presented to W 3 NAB since the

4:16:48September 1st cancellation?

4:16:50>> No. So um the the project was not

4:16:53presented to the NAB. Uh the NAB meeting

4:16:55where it was scheduled to be presented

4:16:57was cancelled um and uh they were not

4:17:01able to make it to the next pres uh next

4:17:03opportunity. Um but they fulfilled their

4:17:06technical obligation because they were

4:17:08scheduled to go to the NAB, but the NAB

4:17:10was cancelled um at no with no fault of

4:17:14of their own.

4:17:15>> Okay. All right. I get it. I I'll uh

4:17:17I'll definitely have some some thoughts

4:17:19on that or suggestions um you know, as

4:17:21this conversation evolves tonight. Um

4:17:25uh but but moving on from that uh you

4:17:28know and going back to the traffic

4:17:30component of this project um I was

4:17:33curious whether it's you Jeff or part of

4:17:35the team you know that's with us tonight

4:17:37Mr. Thornley and crew, I I was curious

4:17:40um on a on a full stadium day or as

4:17:43Commissioner McKenzie noted on a

4:17:45multiple game or competing event day,

4:17:47which may not happen based on the

4:17:49conversations, but even on a full

4:17:51stadium day, how how would the how would

4:17:54that impact the level of service traffic

4:17:57in the surrounding region? Because Moana

4:18:00in present day is quite horrendous as

4:18:03some folks might know. So, I'm just cur

4:18:05Yeah, I'm just curious what this will do

4:18:07to that and what the mitigation efforts

4:18:09are.

4:18:10>> Great question. Um, I've been waiting to

4:18:12stand up here and talk about traffic.

4:18:14Thank you. Uh, my name is Dr. Devin

4:18:16Moore uh with Kimley Horn representing

4:18:18the project. Vice Chair, commissioners,

4:18:21thanks for staying with us tonight. Um,

4:18:24we have done a full traffic study that

4:18:25the city of Reno has already reviewed at

4:18:28the Nevada Department of Transportation

4:18:29has already reviewed as well. City of

4:18:31Reno provided comments for us and we

4:18:33addressed those comments. The city uh

4:18:35the state has also provided comments and

4:18:37we have addressed those comments. So

4:18:39we're we're in that process right now.

4:18:42Part of the recommendation of the

4:18:43traffic study was to prepare an event

4:18:46management plan. So there are some

4:18:49unknowns that we still don't um have in

4:18:51place right now as to what size and what

4:18:54frequency of events we're going to see

4:18:56at this event venue. And it's pretty

4:18:59typical for event venues to have varying

4:19:01sizes of events. And so we generally

4:19:03have separate and distinct event

4:19:06management plans for the different sizes

4:19:08because the mitigations are different.

4:19:10And so to directly answer your question,

4:19:13Commissioner Bera, um we have done two

4:19:15different analyses as part of our

4:19:16traffic study. one that is a typical

4:19:18day. That's looking at all the the

4:19:20venues that have been, you know,

4:19:21described really well here today that

4:19:23are not the traffic uh that are not the

4:19:26the stadium itself, the soccer stadium.

4:19:29Um and then we have a separate analysis

4:19:31that is the event scenario. And that

4:19:33event scenario is not looking at a

4:19:36typical commute hour, you know, in the

4:19:38morning or in the afternoon. It's

4:19:40looking at when the event time would be.

4:19:42So typically we have events um that are

4:19:45at 7 p.m. or they start later than that.

4:19:47So those of us that are trying to get

4:19:48home from work generally in that typical

4:19:51commute hour is before between 4 and

4:19:536:00 p.m. So we see the background

4:19:56traffic actually decrease when we're

4:19:58expecting our people to be coming and

4:20:00attracted to the to the the event venue

4:20:03itself. And on the on the egress

4:20:06scenario, you know, we're looking hours

4:20:07after that, right? And so that has an

4:20:09even lower background volume there. So

4:20:11we study those traffic volumes and those

4:20:14patterns as part of our study. We do

4:20:16expect that there is going to be an

4:20:18event load. We do have thousands of

4:20:20vehicles and pedestrians that are

4:20:22leaving the site at the same time. Um

4:20:24particularly on these sellout events

4:20:26when we're going to have, you know, an

4:20:28at capacity crowd. And so in those

4:20:31instances, we have temporary event

4:20:34management plans that go into place. And

4:20:36so again, those have not yet been

4:20:37defined. That's a a condition that we're

4:20:39expecting and I think as part of part of

4:20:41this um motion and approval that you

4:20:43have in front of you to develop that

4:20:45event management plan and we do that

4:20:47with the city. We do that with the state

4:20:49as well um with NDOT and that's putting

4:20:52and you've seen this um up at UNR and

4:20:54other places I'm sure as you've traveled

4:20:56and with large events and even I mean

4:20:58you see it at at parks as well when

4:21:00there's a large festival or or you know

4:21:02we're putting the balloons up for

4:21:03example. We we put out cones and we say,

4:21:06"Hey, this lane is no longer going to be

4:21:08a through lane. It's going to be a right

4:21:09lane that turns into the parking lot."

4:21:11And you've got flaggers that are out

4:21:13there that are telling you that. You've

4:21:14got signs that are out there that are

4:21:15telling you that. And on event egress,

4:21:18um maybe instead of everybody being able

4:21:20to go whichever way they want, we're

4:21:21going to make everybody go right and

4:21:23we're going to make everybody turn. And

4:21:25so to be able to manage then disperse

4:21:27the traffic to get out to the network to

4:21:29then be able to accommodate um the

4:21:31volumes that we're expecting. That's the

4:21:33process that we go through. So the first

4:21:36answer is and hopefully everybody feels

4:21:38comfortable on this side and and Jeff

4:21:41presented this from the city that on the

4:21:43typical day scenario, we are covered. So

4:21:46the the improvements that already exist

4:21:48out on the roadway and the capacities

4:21:50that are there can accommodate the

4:21:52additional traffic that we're expecting

4:21:53from the casino and from the restaurants

4:21:55and the retail and the commercial that's

4:21:57expected to go in in the district around

4:22:00um the event venue. and um and then in

4:22:03the event scenario, we are we are

4:22:05expecting that we're going to need some

4:22:07mitigation out on the street. Um that's

4:22:10going to be temporary in nature. Now,

4:22:11one of the recommendations that might

4:22:13not have been brought up, but it was

4:22:14mentioned in one of the public comments

4:22:16that I'd like to address is a left out

4:22:18of Kitsky, you know, from the old

4:22:20Jo-Ann's. 100% a concern and we're

4:22:23putting more traffic on that specific

4:22:25parcel. We still expect people want to

4:22:27go south um for example, out of there.

4:22:29We are recommending and have coordinated

4:22:31with this with the city and with NDOT as

4:22:33Kitsky currently is is owned and

4:22:35operated maintained by the state. Um so

4:22:38we have had those discussions with them

4:22:39to install a new traffic signal to allow

4:22:42pedestrians to get east west safely

4:22:44across Kitsky and also to get employees

4:22:46or excuse me uh event patrons out of the

4:22:49property or anybody that's patronizing

4:22:51the property um to get out southbound on

4:22:53a Kitsky as well as northbound there and

4:22:55then southbound left safely into the

4:22:57property.

4:22:58>> Great. Um, just a quick followup on

4:23:00that. Thank you so much for that. The

4:23:02So, I don't I don't think I heard and

4:23:04it's okay if the answer is unknown right

4:23:07now because I think that's how you

4:23:08prefaced it, but was there a an

4:23:11anticipated level of service change

4:23:14>> on on one of those days?

4:23:15>> In the event scenario, most certainly.

4:23:17Yes. And so, the event scenario,

4:23:20[clears throat] we are going to expect

4:23:21without mitigation, we're going to

4:23:23expect um unacceptable is the way that

4:23:26we would describe it in city code.

4:23:27unacceptable level of service, meaning

4:23:29there's a delay at a signalized

4:23:30intersection that's more than an average

4:23:33of 60 seconds per vehicle. Um, so that's

4:23:36the way it's termed in code. Uh, from an

4:23:38event scenario, people do expect that

4:23:41and event patrons expect that. Um,

4:23:44people that live in the area avoid the

4:23:46area when they know that there's going

4:23:47to be event traffic. But also we we are

4:23:51we are planning and recommending um

4:23:54Commissioner Bera that we do an event

4:23:55scenario um uh excuse me an event

4:23:58management plan to be able to

4:24:00accommodate that and make sure that

4:24:02those high delay movements are receiving

4:24:06additional capacity um when we're

4:24:08temporarily changing the intersection

4:24:10configurations.

4:24:11>> Fantastic. And just the the second

4:24:14component to that followup would be for

4:24:16that traffic management plan. Does that

4:24:18take into account the anticipated volume

4:24:22increase in traffic with the um GSR

4:24:25arena that's you know also going up and

4:24:28will probably be live prior to the the

4:24:30soccer stadium. Does that because it's

4:24:32not that far away as well, right?

4:24:34>> It is not that far away. No, that's a

4:24:35great point. Um, currently it does not.

4:24:37Uh, I would say and so I I live in Las

4:24:40Vegas and I do a lot of event management

4:24:42plans and I've really caught myself

4:24:44saying ballpark here a couple of times

4:24:46because I did the the traffic study for

4:24:47the A's ballpark. This is not a

4:24:49[clears throat] ballpark. Um, this

4:24:51soccer stadium. And so one of those

4:24:54coordination items kind of like we

4:24:56discussed with the convention center is

4:24:58understanding when the combined events

4:25:00are happening to avoid those dates. And

4:25:03so, um, this happens a lot in Las Vegas

4:25:06right now where we don't have the Golden

4:25:07Knights and and the Raiders play at the

4:25:09same on the same night, for example, or

4:25:11if they do, you know, one's a day game,

4:25:13one's a night game, those kind of things

4:25:15are happening. So, as we grow as a city

4:25:17of Reno and as we bring more

4:25:19professional events like these, there

4:25:21needs to be more coordination and that

4:25:24can be done, you know, partyto party.

4:25:26And you know, in some cases, like in

4:25:28like in Las Vegas, for example, the

4:25:29county actually manages the special use

4:25:32permits for for each uh for each large

4:25:34event. So, I think as as we grow and as

4:25:37we iterate and as we define where those

4:25:40problems are and how to best solve them,

4:25:42um I think that could be something

4:25:44that's developed into the future.

4:25:46>> All right, great. Thank you for that. Uh

4:25:47I'll yield my time. I do have a few more

4:25:49questions though, but I'll I'll volley

4:25:51with whoever else wants to go next.

4:25:54>> All right. Thanks, M. Commissioner

4:25:56Brera. Uh, for mine, I have staff. Thank

4:26:00you for your time for the moment.

4:26:03Uh, Mr. Foster, um,

4:26:06if this project doesn't move forward,

4:26:08we're moving this gaming overlay to a

4:26:11new location. Is there a procedural

4:26:13method, uh, that we're allowed to

4:26:16implement that would tie the moving um,

4:26:20the gaming overlay to this project? and

4:26:23if it doesn't go through to pull it

4:26:25back.

4:26:28>> Interesting question. [laughter]

4:26:30Lauren Lauren looks like she wants to

4:26:32chime in on this.

4:26:33>> Sure, I I'll chime in on this piece. Um

4:26:35again, Lauren Knox for the record. So,

4:26:37there there isn't a mechanism for the

4:26:39master plan amendment and the zoning map

4:26:41amendment to be able to tie it to a

4:26:43conditional use permit. So, the the

4:26:45short answer is no. I will say though,

4:26:48the gaming overlay is intended to be in

4:26:51place to accommodate for any

4:26:53non-restricted gaming, any

4:26:54non-restricted gaming within the city's

4:26:57development code. So, if it's if anyone

4:26:59wants to do a new non-restricted gaming,

4:27:01it has to go within a gaming overlay and

4:27:03that has to be reviewed via a

4:27:05conditional use permit. So, the gaming

4:27:07overlay in itself does not allow for

4:27:10anything cart blanch. It allows for you

4:27:12to come forward with a conditional use

4:27:14permit. So, while it doesn't tie

4:27:16anything, having the gaming overlay in

4:27:18place in a location isn't going to allow

4:27:20for something additional to happen

4:27:22without this body reviewing a

4:27:24conditional use permit first. So, I

4:27:26don't know that that answers your

4:27:27question exactly, but no, we can't

4:27:29condition a master plan amendment or

4:27:30zoning map amendment is the short

4:27:31answer.

4:27:32>> It's not the answer I wanted, but I

4:27:34understand your explanation of it and I

4:27:37appreciate you so thoroughly. Yeah, Mr.

4:27:39Thornley, go ahead. Of course, I agree

4:27:40completely with the analysis that a

4:27:42master plan amendment or a zone change

4:27:43cannot be conditioned that way. Uh, but

4:27:46I do think there's some nuance here in

4:27:48that absent a pending application that's

4:27:51that's reliant on that zoning, the city

4:27:53could self sponsor an amendment to the

4:27:55master plan or to the zoning and roll

4:27:57things back that way.

4:27:59>> Okay. So we don't have a mechanism but

4:28:01the city might the city could on its own

4:28:03choose to pull back that correct after

4:28:07>> absolutely if this doesn't go through we

4:28:09can certainly move forward on on staff's

4:28:10end or through council to initiate an

4:28:12amendment like that. Absolutely.

4:28:13>> Okay. Um the only other thing I had was

4:28:17uh Mr. Thornley maybe you could answer

4:28:19this. I think Commissioner Bera touched

4:28:21on it. I'm trying to stick to the gaming

4:28:22overlay because if not I'll get lost. Um

4:28:26with that NAB 3 meeting canceled. I know

4:28:29you fulfilled your obligation, but can

4:28:30can you elaborate on what else you might

4:28:32be doing um outside of that so we can as

4:28:35far as the public's involved?

4:28:36>> We fully intend to reach out to the NAB

4:28:39um probably be via letter um with a

4:28:43number of parts of this presentation and

4:28:45the presentation we intended to give in

4:28:46the first instance. We're going to

4:28:48invite their comments um and where they

4:28:51can be adopted. Um I'm I'm certain that

4:28:54the design team and the and the

4:28:55ownership team will give them a a fair

4:28:58look. Okay.

4:28:58>> Um the outreach efforts

4:29:01>> projectwide and and for the soccer club

4:29:03in particular continue in earnest. Uh

4:29:05and so I think there will be a number of

4:29:07opportunities um on top of the number of

4:29:10opportunities that have already existed

4:29:12for the surrounding area to participate

4:29:15in this process. and the MPA. Uh

4:29:18>> oh, yeah.

4:29:18>> Meeting that you had to have

4:29:19>> and the Well, and we did have a

4:29:21neighborhood meeting.

4:29:22>> Okay.

4:29:23>> Um and three people showed up.

4:29:26>> Okay.

4:29:26>> But, um we did have that in advance of

4:29:28the the more formal NAB meeting. Uh and

4:29:32so we were looking forward to do that,

4:29:33too. We were disappointed that our

4:29:35schedules didn't align. I was out of

4:29:36town, so at least one of those times was

4:29:38my fault, and I'll blame everyone else

4:29:40for the other time. But we do

4:29:42[clears throat] fully intend to reach

4:29:44out to to that body and ask for their

4:29:46comments so that they're incorporated in

4:29:48the in the project.

4:29:49>> Okay. Awesome. Thanks, Mr. Thornley. Uh

4:29:52that's all for me in this round. Uh

4:29:55Commissioner McCoy.

4:29:56>> Thank you, Chair. Commissioner McCoy for

4:29:57the record. Um and this might be for the

4:30:00applicant. uh let I mean you know if you

4:30:03want to come up staff's presentation um

4:30:06said there's going to be no or minimal

4:30:07smoke as part of the public health

4:30:09finding but we are also talking about a

4:30:11casino and I haven't seen anything about

4:30:14its smoking policy. So my question is

4:30:18will smoking be permitted on the gaming

4:30:20floor?

4:30:21>> I'm going to defer uh I don't know the

4:30:22answer to your question so I'm going to

4:30:24defer to uh our gaming person Mr. Dean

4:30:27Dillo.

4:30:32Hi, my name is Dean Dulo.

4:30:35Um, yes, uh, it's going to be a very

4:30:38typical local casino. Uh, there's going

4:30:41to be a smoking area and we're also

4:30:43going to be providing a non-smoking

4:30:45area. Uh, this non-smoking area is going

4:30:48to be the area most adjacent to the

4:30:50restaurants.

4:30:54>> Okay. Thank you. That's that's the great

4:30:56answer for you staff. I'll have some

4:30:57follow-ups then on that.

4:30:58>> Okay. Yeah, go ahead.

4:30:59>> May I chime in on that? That was a a

4:31:03different reading of smoke, glare, dust,

4:31:06noise than I had expected. So, when I

4:31:10was talking about smoke, uh, when when

4:31:12we on that finding in particular, what

4:31:15what what staff looks at, at least what

4:31:18I look at, um, is the, you know, does

4:31:21the project generate smoke? Does the

4:31:23project generate noise, vibration,

4:31:25fumes, all of those things as opposed to

4:31:29smoke within a building? Um, so that's

4:31:32not the smoke that I was looking at. The

4:31:34project clearly, you know, is not a

4:31:37factory or something, you know, putting

4:31:39out smoke is kind of the the approach

4:31:41that the way I read.

4:31:43>> What's that? [laughter]

4:31:44>> Oh, yeah.

4:31:45>> Uh, okay. Okay. So then when you analyze

4:31:47this, you did not analyze because I

4:31:49didn't see anything in any of the

4:31:50submitted materials about ventilation

4:31:53um adjacency of restaurants. I mean I

4:31:55appreciate the non-smoking uh kind of

4:31:58section. Uh I used to fly all the time

4:32:00when I was younger on the no smoking

4:32:01section of the plane. Always got me uh

4:32:04uh got me sick actually. But um so I I

4:32:07didn't see any of that in here. Is that

4:32:09by design or is that just not something

4:32:12staff normally looks at? I know that a

4:32:14brand new casino is probably not

4:32:16something we get a lot of here in in

4:32:18Reno. And I was just surprised that I

4:32:21thought, well, there's no smoke. There's

4:32:22no this is this is great or it's not

4:32:24great or whatever it's going to be. But

4:32:25I didn't see any discussion or analysis

4:32:27on smoking inside. Um and didn't know if

4:32:30that was by design or

4:32:32>> definitely not part of what we look at.

4:32:34um you saw the seven requests that that

4:32:37were being made um in terms of 24-hour

4:32:40operations and height above 85 ft and

4:32:42and those kinds of things. You know,

4:32:44within the context of the seven requests

4:32:47uh and the overall project, we obviously

4:32:49look at what what what I say we meaning

4:32:52planning looks at landscaping, parking,

4:32:55you know, those kinds of things. um

4:32:58looking at separation on on smoking and

4:33:00non-smoking and that's more kind of

4:33:02probably environmental control public

4:33:04health Northern Nevada Public Health. Um

4:33:06that's not a that's not a city of Reno

4:33:08planning uh review. Looks like Doug

4:33:11wants to chime in.

4:33:12>> I I think what I would offer is is the

4:33:13question that you're asking and its

4:33:16relation to the indoor clean air act. Um

4:33:18we're probably a little early in the

4:33:20stages of design to be able to

4:33:22adequately answer your question tonight

4:33:25beyond of course we will comply with the

4:33:27indoor clean air act but with respect to

4:33:29what ventilation looks like how the HVAC

4:33:31system functions whether or not you know

4:33:34that's a that's an upgrade in in your

4:33:37estimation from where we stand today. Um

4:33:40as we talked about before we sort of

4:33:41have to get through the entitlements

4:33:43before anyone would spend the money to

4:33:45do that sort of design.

4:33:48Okay, Commissioner Koi for the record. I

4:33:49I appreciate I didn't have an answer, so

4:33:51now I have an answer. I I I appreciate

4:33:53that. Thank you.

4:33:58>> Anybody else?

4:33:59>> All right.

4:33:59>> Uh, Commissioner Delvr, uh, Mr.

4:34:02Thornley, I think these might be for you

4:34:05and it's um in reference to not not just

4:34:08sewer, which might be a city question,

4:34:10but um to the person who is representing

4:34:13the neighbors, you know, concerns that

4:34:15they had, cost issues that other

4:34:18neighboring folks might run into. Can

4:34:21you kind of address some of the concerns

4:34:23that that they had?

4:34:24>> Of course. Um what I can tell you is

4:34:27there have been a number of

4:34:28conversations between the property

4:34:29owners on this topic. Um I'm not certain

4:34:33that we fully disagree, but we

4:34:35definitely don't agree with the framing

4:34:37of that issue. Um Mr. Aker was actually

4:34:39part of those conversations. He's

4:34:41probably the best person to

4:34:42>> Oh, okay. Great.

4:34:43>> answer the the question on the driveway.

4:34:46>> The driveway.

4:34:49>> Uh Thomas Hacket, Kimley Horn, um civil

4:34:52engineer. Uh, regarding the property to

4:34:54the north, the Cow Ranch property, the

4:34:56original site plan that was being

4:34:58presented and reviewed with the city,

4:35:00uh, utilized a share driveway with Cow

4:35:03Ranch, similar to how the current Ford

4:35:05dealership was using that driveway

4:35:06today. Based on the conversations with

4:35:09the property owner, uh, it was requested

4:35:14to not do that due to potential impacts

4:35:16to their property. The site plan as it's

4:35:19currently designed today maintains the

4:35:20driveway width at the shared width size

4:35:24tapers down on the property to maintain

4:35:27the property line in its historic state.

4:35:30There is a wall curb for drainage all on

4:35:34this property site. There's no

4:35:35improvements proposed on this property

4:35:38or the cow ranch property. Regarding

4:35:41sewer, the sewer number is extremely

4:35:44high because it's based on soldout

4:35:47events every day of the year. So, we've

4:35:49had some initial conversations with city

4:35:51staff about that and similar to other

4:35:54stadium models have recommended doing

4:35:56flow meters to look at the flow and

4:35:59monitor the flow of what's actually

4:36:01coming out of the stadium. When there's

4:36:02not a stadium event, there's no sewer

4:36:04coming out of the stadium. So, the

4:36:06numbers are substantially lower and more

4:36:08in line with the standards. Okay.

4:36:10There's the hotel though, too.

4:36:12>> Yes. No, the hotel, the casino, the

4:36:13restaurants, all of those fall within

4:36:15more of this more standard range. It's

4:36:17just

4:36:18>> 6,000 seat sold out event every day of

4:36:21the year

4:36:23>> drives up the number.

4:36:24>> Got it. Okay. Thank you. And then um I

4:36:28think I think it's for you. Um just in

4:36:30general, my understanding is that the

4:36:32season is supposed to kick off in 2028.

4:36:37this project will not I mean

4:36:40good luck to you but probably won't be

4:36:42done by then or so I guess

4:36:46>> we're right on the threshold of whether

4:36:48or not we can pull it off.

4:36:49>> Okay. And is there uh contingency plans

4:36:52in place if that doesn't happen and how

4:36:54might that affect

4:36:56>> Well, I'll actually let the soccer

4:36:58franchisees um answer that question.

4:37:01>> Perfect. That would be great.

4:37:04>> I mean, we're hopeful. I'm just

4:37:07[laughter]

4:37:08>> Hi, Wendy Damonte, CEO of Reno City FC.

4:37:11Thank you so much for the opportunity

4:37:12and for being here tonight. Um, so yes,

4:37:16our goal is to go live in 2028. Um, we

4:37:19anticipate that. If we if the field is

4:37:22not ready by then, if the stadium is not

4:37:24open, then there are several options

4:37:27around town. So, we are talking to those

4:37:30people. We are looking at what might be

4:37:32best for not only our players but also

4:37:34fans who want to come watch. Um, but as

4:37:37you know, soccer is a growing sport in

4:37:39this community and it's we're getting in

4:37:42fact more fields by as we speak. So,

4:37:45pretty exciting times right now, but

4:37:47there are several options where we could

4:37:49have a contingency plan to play in 2028

4:37:51if need be.

4:37:52>> Okay, great. Thank you so much.

4:37:54>> That's all I have for now.

4:37:56>> All right, Commissioner Bera.

4:37:58>> Great. Thank you so much. Um gosh, just

4:38:01a couple of quick questions, but uh

4:38:03first do want to thank uh thank you Mr.

4:38:04Thornley for that assist you gave

4:38:06earlier on the question around the

4:38:08gaming overlay rollback scenario. Um

4:38:11very cool. And I was wondering as this

4:38:14project progresses, whether it's for you

4:38:15or Wendy or someone else on the team,

4:38:18does this team or do you all anticipate

4:38:20pursuing like any financial credits or

4:38:22tips that the public should be aware of

4:38:24at this point um or at this stage of the

4:38:27game? We, Commissioner Biserero, we have

4:38:29not made any sort of final decision on

4:38:32whether or not to use all of the tools

4:38:34that exist within the redevelopment

4:38:36area. Um, we're certainly still putting

4:38:38together the capital stack that will be

4:38:40necessary to build a project of this

4:38:41magnitude.

4:38:42>> Um, you know, for example, um, this

4:38:46particular census tract is right on the

4:38:50cusp of being eligible for the second

4:38:52iteration of opportunity zones. uh and

4:38:55there's a lot of noise in the statistics

4:38:57that went into that treasury

4:38:58determination. Uh and so John Restrepo

4:39:01uh at RCG economics looked into that for

4:39:04us. Um and we've had a conversation with

4:39:07the governor's office, a series of

4:39:09conversations with the governor's office

4:39:10about whether or not an offlist

4:39:12nomination would be appropriate for this

4:39:14particular census tract. That would be a

4:39:16huge boon to to the project and its

4:39:18financibility. Um but until things like

4:39:22that start falling into place and the

4:39:24and the picture comes into sharper

4:39:25relief, we're not prepared to say what

4:39:27we would or would not do in that regard.

4:39:30>> Okay. Awesome. I was asking just in case

4:39:32you did know and and if it does get to

4:39:34that point, you know, the the

4:39:36conversation and based on kind of

4:39:39sentiment or feedback is so far if you

4:39:41did go down that route, there would be a

4:39:43an encouragement to pursue union labor.

4:39:45Of course.

4:39:46>> Of course.

4:39:46>> That you know, we'll get there when we

4:39:48get there. And then uh I'll quickly

4:39:50disclose as a fun side note. I grew up

4:39:53watching Wendy Demani on the local news.

4:39:55So that's kind of a fun thing. Um

4:39:58but I did kind of want to circle back

4:40:00maybe a question for you Jeff. Um I I

4:40:03made a note of this here. There was a

4:40:05there was a gentleman earlier that uh

4:40:07and I'm sorry if I'm mispronouncing this

4:40:09or mislabeling this, but um mentioned

4:40:12that uh he was with the Gators and and

4:40:16mentioned or potentially requested a a

4:40:19condition

4:40:21revolving around egress ingress for

4:40:24minor site plan reviews. Does that ring

4:40:26a bell?

4:40:27>> It does. Yes. So Gator is it Gator

4:40:31Development is the name?

4:40:32>> Investments.

4:40:33>> Gator Investments. They own the center

4:40:36to the north. Um and but my

4:40:40[clears throat] understanding is as uh

4:40:42as was just described um that that there

4:40:45is no impact. The the original site

4:40:48design involved some kind of

4:40:50cross-pollination there at that northern

4:40:53uh which would be back of house for the

4:40:56>> the cow ranch store. Thank you. um that

4:41:00the uh you know that there would be some

4:41:02interplay there, but that this the site

4:41:04design has uh changed to where that's no

4:41:08longer the case and there's no longer

4:41:10that potential impact on uh on the

4:41:13operations of the uh trucks and whatnot

4:41:16accessing the back of those properties.

4:41:19>> Okay. All right. Fantastic. Just made a

4:41:20note. Just want to make sure if we

4:41:22needed to address it further, we did,

4:41:23but sounds like we're good. So, thanks,

4:41:25Jeff. Um, those are all my questions for

4:41:28now. Unless something else kind of, uh,

4:41:29comes to mind, uh, I'll I'll kind of

4:41:31yield back and, uh, look forward to

4:41:33deliberation.

4:41:37>> Okay. Any more questions?

4:41:41Mr. McCoy, Commissioner,

4:41:43>> Commissioner McCoy, for the record.

4:41:44Thank you, Chair. I just have one final

4:41:45question for legal. Um, is there an

4:41:49exception to

4:41:53Reno Municipal Code 18.04? 04.1407

4:41:59for barely perceptible.

4:42:10>> I'm sorry. Can you provide the code side

4:42:13again?

4:42:14>> Absolutely. That's it's a quite a

4:42:15mouthful. Um 18.04.147

4:42:1904.147

4:42:24governing noise.

4:42:56Commissioner McCoy for the record. And

4:42:57just just to make it easy on you, just

4:42:59looking for a yes or no. Thanks.

4:43:24Well, under this code, it doesn't it

4:43:29talks about exclusions but then says

4:43:31that the subject source may not increase

4:43:33existing levels.

4:43:40>> Yes or no? Is that

4:43:48>> exclusions for existing higher ambient

4:43:50noise levels where existing ambient

4:43:52noise levels already exceed the

4:43:54standards of this article as of the

4:43:55effective date of this title, the

4:43:57subject source may not increase existing

4:44:00levels.

4:44:03>> Okay, Commissioner McCoy for the record.

4:44:04So, I'm I'm taking that to to read.

4:44:06There is no exception for barely

4:44:08perceptible. Thank you.

4:44:13You have anything else, Commissioner

4:44:14McCoy? Was that what that was your

4:44:16thing? Okay. Uh did you want to vice

4:44:19chair respond to that?

4:44:20>> If I could please.

4:44:21>> Um I fully appreciate the point.

4:44:23>> Uh for context, ordinary conversation

4:44:26conversation in this room is approaching

4:44:2940 dB. Um when we were talking about

4:44:33three and a fraction dB, it's a very

4:44:36very very small amount of noise. Uh, and

4:44:39so when staff says it's imperceptible,

4:44:43particularly over highway noise, it is

4:44:46measurable, but it is not something that

4:44:49any ordinary person would notice or be

4:44:52affected by.

4:45:03Okay.

4:45:04Any other questions?

4:45:07Uh, I'll have one, too. I I I was busy

4:45:09doing some procedural stuff. Did we

4:45:11confirm or did I miss that we had a

4:45:13signed agreement with the RCVA for

4:45:16parking?

4:45:19>> Uh the agreement is not executed. It is

4:45:21agreed to in principle.

4:45:22>> Okay.

4:45:22>> But it does need to be approved by the R

4:45:24RSCVA board. Uh and Mr. Laretta did not

4:45:28believe that was prudent prior to the

4:45:30entitlement. So he didn't want to tie up

4:45:32the parking lot without a project to go

4:45:34with it.

4:45:35>> Okay. Uh, I guess my commission, Mr. uh,

4:45:38my question, Mr. Thornne, would be,

4:45:40would the applicant object to a

4:45:42condition that says that we need that?

4:45:47>> I don't think we would object to a

4:45:48condition that said you need the

4:45:51equivalent of 800 and however many

4:45:55spaces within a certain proximity to the

4:45:58site.

4:45:59>> So, if you got it somewhere else,

4:46:01essentially the same thing.

4:46:02>> Yes.

4:46:03>> Okay. All right. Okay. Thanks, Mr.

4:46:06Thornley.

4:46:09Uh, that was all for me, Mr. Mercer.

4:46:11Commissioner, you're good. Okay. Uh, if

4:46:14that will wrap up questions, uh, we can

4:46:16move into, uh, discussion.

4:46:19>> Can we May I ask Commissioner DR if we

4:46:23can do the discussion and vote one at a

4:46:25time for these two?

4:46:28>> Yeah, 100%. you'd like to separate. You

4:46:30want to do the um zoning map, I'm sorry,

4:46:33the gaming overlay first as the

4:46:35itinerary says and then go to the other

4:46:37one. Okay.

4:46:38>> Yep.

4:46:38>> Um I had a question for council about

4:46:42the absence

4:46:44um of two commissioners. Did we come to

4:46:46a determination on that?

4:46:50>> Yes. So um NRS281A420

4:46:55uh decreases the quorum by the number of

4:46:59commissioners that are um that had to

4:47:03recuse.

4:47:05But NRS 278210

4:47:09on a master plan amendment requires

4:47:1223 of the entire body regardless of

4:47:17recusal. So, you're going to need uh

4:47:21five votes for the master plan amendment

4:47:24and three for the cup.

4:47:29>> Thank you very much.

4:47:31Okay, we'll open up um discussion for uh

4:47:35the gaming overlay.

4:47:38>> Who'd like to start?

4:47:42>> Commissioner McCoy. [laughter]

4:47:47I'm sure Delvr's pointing at

4:47:48>> here. Thanks. Thanks for throwing me

4:47:50under the bus there.

4:47:52>> On on this. I really like the the the

4:47:54suggestion or the contemplation of some

4:47:57kind of a a roll back if you know the

4:48:00project isn't built. I I I understand if

4:48:02we can't make that condition tonight. I

4:48:05do I do I do like what you're you were

4:48:08thinking and going with that. So, that

4:48:10would just kind of be my my thoughts on

4:48:12this one is that, you know, um I think I

4:48:14I can make the findings. Um, but I do I

4:48:18I I do, you know, think that it would be

4:48:20nice if if you know what we're all

4:48:22expecting to happen doesn't happen. Um,

4:48:25that that kind of rolls back. So, that's

4:48:27that's kind of where I am tonight.

4:48:30>> Uh, Miss Knox, is that something we

4:48:32could add to our our

4:48:35recommendation?

4:48:38>> So, I'll look to legal it. I'm I'm

4:48:39unsure if that's this is a

4:48:41recommendation to council, so I would

4:48:42believe that that could be something

4:48:43that could be at least included in

4:48:45planning commission's recommendation and

4:48:47and discussed at that level, but I don't

4:48:49know how far we can go with that piece.

4:48:50So, I'll defer to legal.

4:48:52>> Can you please repeat what the request

4:48:54is?

4:48:56>> The the request would be uh um a

4:48:58conversation about pulling back the

4:49:00gaming overlay if this project um does

4:49:04not go forth as a city. not necessarily

4:49:06as a condition from this body, but a

4:49:08bigger conversation that the city would

4:49:10retract this extension of the gaming

4:49:12overlay if this project does not move

4:49:14forward.

4:49:18>> It wouldn't be appropriate as a

4:49:20condition and the city council receives

4:49:23the minutes so your discussion would

4:49:26inform their decision.

4:49:28>> Okay, great. Thanks, Miss Knox.

4:49:33>> Sorry, just to add, Mr. Vice Chair, we

4:49:35could include that in the the staff

4:49:37report that goes to council as as part

4:49:39of the the conversation here with the

4:49:40planning commission as well, just to

4:49:42make sure that it's clear and that the

4:49:43record's clear there.

4:49:45>> Great. Any other discussion?

4:49:49>> Oh, Commissioner Bera, sorry.

4:49:52>> Go ahead.

4:49:52>> Okay. Yeah, I was just going to echo

4:49:54those thoughts. Uh I'm fine, you know,

4:49:56appreciate the the approach there

4:49:58because it sounds like the impetus uh

4:50:01for this gaming overlay is this other

4:50:04project, right? So they kind of go hand

4:50:05in hand. So I I uh I appreciate where uh

4:50:11the conversation's going with that and

4:50:12they can get behind that and um I'm

4:50:15ready to deliberate the other part when

4:50:17everyone else is.

4:50:20>> I I I support this. Um, I don't really

4:50:24have any more um questions or concerns

4:50:27or discussion around it and so I can

4:50:30make a motion for this if we're ready to

4:50:33do so.

4:50:35Uh in the matter this uh Commissioner

4:50:37Delvr in the matter of case LDC26-000070

4:50:43based upon compliance with the

4:50:44applicable findings I move to adopt the

4:50:47master plan amendment by resolution and

4:50:50recommend that city council adopt the

4:50:52master plan and zoning map amendments by

4:50:55ordinance subject to conformance review

4:50:57by the regional planning commission.

4:51:01And I can make the findings. All right,

4:51:03we have a motion.

4:51:06>> Commissioner McCoy, a second.

4:51:07>> All right, a motion and a second. Uh,

4:51:10all those in favor?

4:51:11>> I

4:51:12>> I

4:51:14>> That's a unanimous vote. Um, and so

4:51:16that'll push us on to the second part of

4:51:18this, which would be D6.

4:51:21Uh, we can open up discussion there.

4:51:24>> Great. Uh, Commissioner Bera, um, for

4:51:28the record, I I support the vision

4:51:31behind this project. Um, so I I'll be uh

4:51:36I'll be voting in favor of it. Um, and

4:51:38I'd be happy to make a motion as well as

4:51:41the W3 uh planning commissioner if

4:51:44that's all right with the body if when

4:51:46the time comes. But I do so with

4:51:48appropriate caution. You know, I'm I'm

4:51:50concerned with the traffic, not just for

4:51:53the the particular region or the project

4:51:55site region, but the broader growth that

4:51:57we're anticipating. uh the potential

4:51:59sound issues, the the potential food

4:52:02desert effect that it may create that

4:52:04one of the residents mentioned earlier.

4:52:07And on that, some of the residents you

4:52:09heard from tonight uh during public

4:52:11comment from the adjacent neighborhood,

4:52:14like those individuals could have easily

4:52:16been me at their age cuz I grew up right

4:52:18around the corner from there. So, I

4:52:21definitely know what it feels like to

4:52:22not be a part of the conversation

4:52:23whether it's intentional or not, right?

4:52:25So with that, my strong recommendation

4:52:28to to the uh the team, you know, Wendy

4:52:31and folks, uh I know you all are good uh

4:52:34longtime Neadans and always do right by

4:52:37the community. So I would just, you

4:52:39know, encourage more engagement with the

4:52:42neighbors uh and other stakeholders and

4:52:44and make sure that their inputs shape

4:52:47the final design or the final project.

4:52:50And um if you need help, you know, in

4:52:54that area, connecting with some of those

4:52:55folks, uh please let me know. Pablo

4:52:58Espan, whatever. But uh I I'm a fan of

4:53:02this project.

4:53:05>> All right. Thank you, Commissioner Bera.

4:53:08>> Commissioner Delvier, uh I echo with uh

4:53:11what Commissioner Basera is saying. I I

4:53:13like this project. I like where where

4:53:15it's going. Um, ironically, in the last

4:53:18one, I was disappointed that we didn't

4:53:20have everything together and here

4:53:22there's a lot there's a lot going on in

4:53:23here. Um, and so there there's a lot to

4:53:26kind of uh sort through and process. Um,

4:53:28and we did focus a lot on the stadium

4:53:30and soccer and there's a lot of other

4:53:32things that would be part of it, the

4:53:34hotel, um, amusement, recreation, um,

4:53:36and some of the other um, contingencies

4:53:39and and conditions that would need to be

4:53:41put in place. Um, but I can support

4:53:43[clears throat] this project as well.

4:53:46All right. Thank you, Commissioner

4:53:48Dovar.

4:53:50>> Um, Commissioner McKenzie, when I first

4:53:52started looking at all this and before

4:53:54we had the meeting, I had a few bullet

4:53:56points that were of concern. One of them

4:53:58was parking, the lack thereof with

4:54:00pulling those numbers down. Uh, noise

4:54:03was a big concern for me. Uh, traffic

4:54:07traffic control um on peak hours and

4:54:10peak event times. And then the fact that

4:54:13the neighborhood wasn't as in engaged or

4:54:16involved because the NAB cancelled. I

4:54:19still would like to see some more

4:54:20engagement there with the with the

4:54:22neighborhood to make sure that it's not

4:54:24at odds.

4:54:26That's a great project. It's a great

4:54:28project to have in the neighborhood as

4:54:30long as you have buyin from the

4:54:31neighborhood. And I think that's really

4:54:32important and I think the players

4:54:34involved can see that too. Having said

4:54:36all that, I think I can find the find

4:54:38see the findings and I don't have any

4:54:41more concerns about those items I just

4:54:43um that I just mentioned.

4:54:48>> All right, Commissioner McKenzie. Uh

4:54:51thank you. And Commissioner McCoy,

4:54:52>> Commissioner McCoy, for the record.

4:54:54Thank you. Um

4:54:57I I struggle sitting here. I'm probably

4:54:59the most pro soccer person on this on

4:55:02this uh

4:55:03>> this commission. Um, you know, I'm a I'm

4:55:05a youth coach. I've got kids who play,

4:55:07and so there's nothing that I like to

4:55:09see more than um, you know, more soccer

4:55:12in Reno, but that's not what I see my

4:55:15role as in in in in doing tonight. I'm

4:55:18being asked to make specific findings in

4:55:20code, and one of those is that

4:55:23everything about this project complies

4:55:24with the Reno Municipal Code. And as

4:55:28staff clearly explained at the beginning

4:55:31of their presentation tonight, there are

4:55:34standards limits for noise at day and

4:55:37night times.

4:55:40And the ambient sound that we have at

4:55:43this location already exceeds those

4:55:45limits. The reasons for it really don't

4:55:48matter. Um the code doesn't care. It

4:55:51just says here are the limits. We are

4:55:54already exceeding those limits. And the

4:55:56code specifically [clears throat] um

4:55:58that I cited earlier that I asked

4:56:00through legal, I'm just going to say it

4:56:01again. RMC18.04.1407B

4:56:07explicitly states you cannot

4:56:10increase that sound. And so while I I

4:56:13hate to not be able to support this

4:56:15tonight, I'm not going to be able to get

4:56:17there with that finding. I can't find

4:56:19that it complies with title 18 if it is

4:56:22going to

4:56:24increase the sound levels. And and while

4:56:28I think there's a great justification

4:56:29for modifying our code to allow for

4:56:31maybe a barely perceptible exception, um

4:56:34I'm not a noise expert and I don't know

4:56:36that staff's a noise expert, but just

4:56:38having people come and tell us, "Oh,

4:56:40don't worry about it. It's not a big

4:56:41deal." It doesn't matter really to me.

4:56:44The code doesn't have an exception. The

4:56:46code is very clear. you can't increase

4:56:48it. I know enough that if you if you

4:56:50have two sounds the same level and you

4:56:52add them together, they don't double.

4:56:54So, the increase is, you know, only

4:56:56going to be a smaller amount anyway, but

4:56:59for whatever reason, our code does not

4:57:00allow an exception for this. And I can't

4:57:03I can't make one up myself, especially

4:57:05with with Legal's answer. So, on that

4:57:08finding, I will not be able to make um

4:57:10make that tonight. And then with regard

4:57:12to the public health and the the smoke

4:57:14issue, I I have significant concerns

4:57:17about the impacts of secondhand smoke on

4:57:21the public that were asking to come to

4:57:23this place um and and the welfare of our

4:57:26community. Uh and and it's possible that

4:57:28once we got down the line, we could see

4:57:30the ventilations, we could see all the

4:57:31things that were in place um that might,

4:57:33you know, kind of ameliate some of those

4:57:35concerns, but I don't have that now. Um,

4:57:38but in any event, you know, it's it's

4:57:40it's where I am tonight and I um

4:57:45will not be able to support this uh

4:57:48application.

4:57:51McCoy.

4:57:53Um,

4:57:59I'd like, if appropriate, to give Jeff

4:58:01um another opportunity to come up and

4:58:05maybe try to help us through this

4:58:07noising. I I understand what

4:58:08Commissioner McCoy is saying. Um and I

4:58:11appreciate uh

4:58:14from a retired law man um the strictness

4:58:17in rules

4:58:20the sentiment that uh the Reno municipal

4:58:23code doesn't allow for anything extra

4:58:26period doesn't explain how we got to the

4:58:28extra part already right and so I'm

4:58:31wondering like

4:58:35if we're already there we've already

4:58:36broken the rule um that doesn't mean

4:58:38that two rules or you know two broken

4:58:40rules make it right. But I think I think

4:58:43for me if if I'm going to [snorts] try

4:58:45to understand a compromise in between

4:58:48Commissioner McCoy and then what I'm

4:58:50guessing is just some real life

4:58:52environments that sometimes play out

4:58:55differently when it was I I through this

4:58:57whole sound thing I was I was reminded

4:58:59of one of the first concerts that was

4:59:01played um in uh the neon line area and I

4:59:06live you know as far as to state line as

4:59:09you can and for whatever reason that one

4:59:11night the bass echoed from all the way

4:59:13from downtown to all the way almost to

4:59:15the state line of Nevada and and uh

4:59:17California and it you could feel it and

4:59:20I thought, "Wow, this is an interesting

4:59:23thing because you couldn't hear the the

4:59:25thing, but you could feel the base." And

4:59:27after some talks with my councilman, we

4:59:30realized that the air can grab that and

4:59:32the the wind was just right and it

4:59:34chandled that out um to the west. And

4:59:37that's kind of the thing. And so the

4:59:39city made arrangements with um Jay and

4:59:42figured that out, fine-tune it, which

4:59:44which is why I kind of appreciate um

4:59:46some of the conditions in there. And I

4:59:47do understand those because I've seen

4:59:49them work. I've seen the city go back

4:59:51and say, "Hey, listen, that didn't work

4:59:53out. That was the wrong outcome. Um we

4:59:56we got to fix that because 10 miles

4:59:58away, they shouldn't be hearing bass in

5:00:00their house." Um, and so, uh, I'm trying

5:00:03to see if you have any addition because

5:00:05I'm in the middle saying that, um, I

5:00:08understand the rule or the law that says

5:00:10no, but I also understand that we've

5:00:12already eclipsed that. And, um, if we're

5:00:15just talking about nominal, um, where do

5:00:19you where do you find yourself in all of

5:00:20that? As I'm going to defer the expert.

5:00:25So, and and should you want uh I believe

5:00:29your team's noise control [snorts] your

5:00:31>> I can speak

5:00:32>> so you can speak on on but if you're

5:00:35asking for my perspective on kind of how

5:00:38I shake out on this

5:00:40>> um

5:00:42for me and and I and I appreciate

5:00:45Commissioner McCoy's bright line, thou

5:00:47shalt not exceed any further.

5:00:51My approach is

5:00:53any project in the area that may not

5:00:56come before this planning commission um

5:00:59because it doesn't involve an

5:01:01entitlement, right? Or even an

5:01:04administrative entitlement that that's

5:01:05reviewed at staff level has the

5:01:08potential to add to the noise

5:01:09environment.

5:01:11And if you know if if it's 0.1 or 0.001,

5:01:16it's still more than zero, right? So in

5:01:19my mind from a logical perspective,

5:01:22anything you know that had any kind of

5:01:25uh exterior noise could add to that

5:01:29noise environment in that area.

5:01:31Would it be discernible or how many

5:01:33digits out from the decimal would you

5:01:35have to go to get there? I don't know.

5:01:38But in my mind that that's where I can

5:01:40say look the the FHWA the Federal

5:01:45Highway Administration has said

5:01:480 to 3 dB I believe is the number are is

5:01:53not perceptible to barely perceptible.

5:01:56And so because we're not talking about

5:01:58going from something that's quiet to

5:02:00something that's loud. We're talking

5:02:02about going from something that's loud

5:02:03to maybe slightly louder. But you won't

5:02:06know. No one no one will know if the

5:02:09models are correct then

5:02:13I don't think I think there's a way to

5:02:15get there knowing that there's a

5:02:17clawback mechanism in a condition that

5:02:20says if there are noise complaints

5:02:23because at the end of the day what does

5:02:25the code serve the code serves to try

5:02:27and minimize impacts on in this case the

5:02:30adjacent residential uses

5:02:32>> right so if they're not harmed in any

5:02:35way or if they are harmed med they have

5:02:37the ability to submit noise complaints

5:02:39that then triggers an action from

5:02:42because of a condition of approval. Then

5:02:45we still achieve and and that and and

5:02:49that uh new modeling or or you know

5:02:51turning the volumes down or whatever

5:02:53like that they had to do at at uh at the

5:02:56neon line or at the you know Glow Plaza

5:02:59or whatever over there the the festival

5:03:00grounds.

5:03:02you still ultimately get to what you're

5:03:04trying to get to, which is minimizing or

5:03:07eliminating the noise impact. So, that's

5:03:10that's where I shake out on it. It's

5:03:12it's not a a strict legal reading. It's

5:03:14more of a what are we trying to achieve?

5:03:16What is the spirit of this? And if we

5:03:18can get there through project design and

5:03:21conditions of approval that may trigger

5:03:24down the road, then that's the the way I

5:03:28think it should go. and you are the

5:03:29planning commission and you get to

5:03:30decide anyway um you know kind of what

5:03:34what uh you know what you want to have

5:03:37happen in in the situation. So

5:03:39>> I I really appreciate that.

5:03:41>> Can I uh can I add add to that

5:03:44Commissioner Delvr? Um and this might be

5:03:46for a variety of people. Um, are there

5:03:50things that you can think of that we

5:03:52could do now or put in as a condition

5:03:57besides after the fact that we know

5:04:00would help reduce the noise level,

5:04:04right? Like I don't know, speakers in,

5:04:06speakers out. I know they had special

5:04:07speakers that went into the J Resort,

5:04:10things like that that we can say we're

5:04:13already doing these things to minimize

5:04:15the impact. And I would submit that that

5:04:17was probably fundamentally part of the

5:04:19modeling in the first place was trying

5:04:22to minimize because of course they don't

5:04:23want to get a result that says there's

5:04:24any increase in noise, right? But yet

5:04:27they they did. So um I I believe you

5:04:30know based on my read of the noise study

5:04:33that they did try and do what they could

5:04:36>> um to minimize noise while still

5:04:38achieving kind of what they would like

5:04:41to achieve in terms of the game day

5:04:43stadium effect kind of a thing. But

5:04:45beyond that, I would defer to the

5:04:47consultant.

5:04:48>> Okay.

5:04:54>> Thomas Aar Kimorn. Uh so the sound study

5:04:57again we're early in the process of

5:04:59design. Sound study included 54 speakers

5:05:03in the stadium bowl aimed at the field

5:05:06at a sound level of 98 dB on the field.

5:05:10That's based on other sports venues

5:05:13comparable size other USL stadiums

5:05:17around. There are options to reduce the

5:05:19number of speakers. There are options to

5:05:22mitigate the placement of them. At this

5:05:25stage, we wanted to be upfront and

5:05:27honest with council and the city of this

5:05:29is a typical. My voice right now is

5:05:32going up and down more than what is

5:05:35shown in the decibel levels. We're

5:05:37talking three dB. I've been kind of

5:05:40recording back and forth just saying

5:05:42most the conversation here is varying

5:05:43about 10 just for reference.

5:05:48>> Thank you. I think again the the issue

5:05:51that uh Commissioner McCoy is having

5:05:53like from just a legal standpoint. It's

5:05:55like it's pretty black and white at this

5:05:58point. So,

5:05:59>> Commissioner McCoy, I I just I just want

5:06:01to make it clear my my perspective isn't

5:06:03that that we should rely on code as a

5:06:06sword to go after people when we get

5:06:08complaints and there's violations. I

5:06:09understand there's significant

5:06:11enforcement issues just with resources.

5:06:13I see code in in many respects as a

5:06:15shield to prevent projects that don't

5:06:18comply with the code from getting

5:06:20approved in the first place. And the

5:06:23problem I see here is that we have

5:06:25evidence from the applicant's own study

5:06:28that says it doesn't comply with code.

5:06:30And I understand the the decibel levels.

5:06:34I I get it. I get it. It I'm I'm not I'm

5:06:37not, you know, just being obtuse. I'm

5:06:38not illogical. To me, that all justifies

5:06:41changing the code, but it doesn't

5:06:43justify ignoring the code for me

5:06:45tonight. And because of that, um, you

5:06:49know, I I I can't use that as a basis to

5:06:52to to make the the finding. And, you

5:06:55know, I I I appreciate the work and

5:06:57that's gone into it. I I really do. Um,

5:07:00and I I don't doubt that they didn't try

5:07:02to minimize um the the sound from that

5:07:05that component, but I just can't see us

5:07:08um entitling a code violation. I mean,

5:07:11we were talking about, well, people

5:07:13complain. Well, we've just authorized

5:07:16them to exceed those limits. So, how is

5:07:18enforcement going to come back around

5:07:20and determine

5:07:22is it any level above what's allowed? Is

5:07:25it above what they projected it to be?

5:07:28How is enforcement going to work with

5:07:29that when we've just authorize them to

5:07:31violate the code anyway? Um and and

5:07:34that's I'm not saying that we're you

5:07:35know I'm just hyper hyp hyperbole here

5:07:39as far as you know the violation but I'm

5:07:41just if we're saying yes this project

5:07:43goes forward even though you expect it

5:07:45to be higher uh in your own your own

5:07:47data um what kind of message are we

5:07:50sending to enforcement in in the first

5:07:51place? So I don't want to I don't want

5:07:53to belabor the issue. It kind of is is I

5:07:56don't see how we condition our way out

5:07:57of ignoring um title 18. Um I understand

5:08:01that we can try to come back after and

5:08:02say well work with us here. But, um,

5:08:05we're here right now. The evidence in

5:08:07front of me from the applicant is that

5:08:09it doesn't comply, and I don't see a way

5:08:12to to to condition or, uh, come back

5:08:15later for that.

5:08:18>> Thank you, Commissioner McCoy. Um,

5:08:21I'm probably not going to ask this

5:08:23question, right? But

5:08:27Mr. Foster, I'm pick on you again.

5:08:31If this is the standard, if if

5:08:33Commissioner McCoy, which I'm I'm not

5:08:35saying I I disagree with him. I think we

5:08:37vary a little bit on the the level of

5:08:39scrutiny that we're applying to it. But

5:08:41if this were the position uh unanimously

5:08:45that the four of us were to take that by

5:08:48their own admission, this is already

5:08:50it's over the allowable thing uh noise

5:08:53level and the property is already in

5:08:56general over what code allows.

5:09:00What's we would have to apply that to

5:09:02every single development. Take take this

5:09:05stadium out of it. The next development

5:09:07that comes around is is am I wrong to

5:09:09say that it's the noise is already over

5:09:12and we're going to have to apply that

5:09:13same standard to every single

5:09:15development from here on out because

5:09:16we're already over the threshold that

5:09:18the law technically already allows or is

5:09:21it just it's just this be based upon the

5:09:23stadium aspect? Well, it's it's

5:09:26principally the stadium because that's

5:09:27the primary noise generator, right? It's

5:09:29an exterior noise source as opposed to

5:09:32activities within the casino or whatnot.

5:09:35Keep in mind there is an open air plaza

5:09:37as well where there will be some

5:09:38potentially some activities and whatnot

5:09:40that could generate noise, but it's

5:09:42clearly the stadium. And that that

5:09:44actually reminds me one of the other

5:09:46things I was going to suggest in terms

5:09:48of how staff looks at this. We're also

5:09:51only talking 17 to 25 times a year kind

5:09:55of a thing. Um

5:10:00>> strategies.

5:10:02>> So um so again, how does staff reconcile

5:10:07this? We're not talking about every day

5:10:09365 around the clock noise. Um you know,

5:10:13that's over the threshold. But that's

5:10:15also what ties back into my point about

5:10:17uh any project that has no entitlement

5:10:22discretionary application but it's

5:10:25allowed by right in that the same

5:10:27vicinity could also add to the noise

5:10:29environment and we would have we you

5:10:31wouldn't be here deliberating on it. You

5:10:33wouldn't have the opportunity to

5:10:34deliberate on it, right? It still could

5:10:36add to the noise environment. Still

5:10:38could be hauled before code enforcement,

5:10:40but you wouldn't you wouldn't be

5:10:42deliberating on it. So that's kind of

5:10:44it's all of those things that I look at

5:10:46from a p the uh staff perspective. The

5:10:50other thing Lauren, are you wanting to

5:10:52chime in? Okay. Um the other thing that

5:10:56[snorts] um

5:10:58uh Doug, you were saying that that the

5:11:00model

5:11:03>> I'll do.

5:11:04>> Okay.

5:11:04>> And and Thomas will attack me when I get

5:11:07it wrong. Um

5:11:10the noise study as it exists today is

5:11:12those 54 speakers pointed at the field.

5:11:15There are no sound mitigation

5:11:17strategies. There's no batting. There's

5:11:19no um construction elements plugged in

5:11:22beyond just the bowl and the speakers

5:11:25pointed at the field. And so it's not

5:11:28only conceivable but probable that those

5:11:30elements as the design comes into

5:11:31sharper relief will appear uh and those

5:11:34numbers will get smaller and smaller

5:11:36perhaps to zero.

5:11:38Okay.

5:11:40Um, I think I will. And

5:11:42>> and and along those lines, in my mind,

5:11:46if if you could add a condition that

5:11:49effectively requires those additional

5:11:51measures, not not a not a reactionary

5:11:54code enforcement type of situation, but

5:11:56a condition that basically says

5:11:59in order to we need to know that you're

5:12:02going to implement uh design measures

5:12:04back and etc. as a as a proactive

5:12:08requirement.

5:12:09>> How about a followup study once we have

5:12:11the designer?

5:12:15>> Yeah. So, I I think there's the

5:12:17potential to add a condition that that

5:12:20you could say thou shalt come forward

5:12:23with zero increase um via follow-up

5:12:26study, fine-tuning the measurements,

5:12:27fine-tuning the the uh uh the measures

5:12:31that they implement, etc. So, but as it

5:12:34stands right now, the model does show a

5:12:36slight increase.

5:12:38>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Foster. Um,

5:12:42for my last piece, I think I think I'm

5:12:44okay with where we're at. Um, if one of

5:12:47my fellow commissioners would like to

5:12:49take a stab at some sort of condition

5:12:52that um talks about implementing sound

5:12:56mitigation. Uh, I I I kind of heard an

5:12:59applicant that may be open to something.

5:13:01Um

5:13:03that's going to take a little bit to

5:13:04word. Um I had originally addressed um

5:13:08and it uh uh a condition to address the

5:13:12lack of a formally signed parking

5:13:15agreement. Um and so I would still like

5:13:18to move forward with that if I um and I

5:13:21have some proposed language. Um

5:13:24Mr. Thornley, would you like to hear

5:13:27that? Yes, please.

5:13:28>> Okay. um

5:13:31after the reg regular um thing we do,

5:13:34right? Subject to the conditions listed

5:13:35in the staff report with an added

5:13:37condition 20 required an ex an executed

5:13:41shared use parking agreement for the

5:13:43RSCVA lot C or an equivalent minimum of

5:13:48845 offsite spaces prior to the stadium

5:13:52certificate of occupancy

5:13:55um as writing into the record. So with

5:13:58either

5:14:00or an an additional the same number.

5:14:03>> Are you okay with that verbiage?

5:14:04>> Yes sir.

5:14:05>> Okay.

5:14:08>> Can I ask uh Mr. Foster to help us with

5:14:11that condition verbiage? I just want to

5:14:14make sure it makes sense for you guys as

5:14:16well.

5:14:17>> I I will I will u watch this again

5:14:20tomorrow night or tomorrow and and

5:14:23craft it in the language that we use.

5:14:26Yes. Wait, that that was very close.

5:14:27Yeah.

5:14:28>> Okay. Sorry, not that one. That one

5:14:29she's talking about.

5:14:30>> I'm talking about the noise one.

5:14:32>> Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I thought we were

5:14:33talking about the one.

5:14:34>> No, I moved on. [laughter]

5:14:38>> Mr. Vice Chair, I'm wondering if we can

5:14:39take I know it's very late, but maybe a

5:14:41threem minute recess so that Mr. Foster

5:14:43and I and the applicants can work on

5:14:45some language and bring it back to you.

5:14:46>> That would be wonderful.

5:14:48>> Wonderful. Yes. Thank you.

5:14:49>> Okay. Uh five minute break, Max. Thanks.

5:20:45Thank you folks for your patience. Uh

5:20:47just a couple more minutes.

5:24:52Okay, the five of us are back present.

5:24:55Five of us are back present. Uh we'll

5:24:56call the meeting back to order. And uh

5:24:59we left off um adding some conditions.

5:25:02And so uh what we asked was staff put it

5:25:05on an easyto read motion

5:25:08[sighs and gasps] instead of

5:25:08peacemailing it. So thanks for the time.

5:25:11If people are ready, I am willing and

5:25:14able maybe to make a motion.

5:25:18>> Commissioner Delvier, go ahead.

5:25:19>> All right, bear with me. Uh,

5:25:21Commissioner Delvr, in the matter of

5:25:24case LDC26-000071,

5:25:30based upon compliance with the

5:25:32applicable findings, I move to approve

5:25:35the conditional use permit subject

5:25:37subject to the conditions listed in the

5:25:40staff report and as updated below.

5:25:44Condition 15. Should amplified

5:25:47entertainment events be programmed, a

5:25:50more detailed event-specific noise

5:25:52analysis shall be prepared and submitted

5:25:54to the city as part of a future study or

5:25:58addendum to demonstrate compliance with

5:26:01applicable noise standards to the

5:26:03satisfaction of the administrator.

5:26:06Condition 17. Prior to the issuance of

5:26:09any building permit for the stadium, the

5:26:11applicant shall prepare a stadium event

5:26:13management plan detailing proposed

5:26:16stadium event traffic management

5:26:18measures and identify threshold triggers

5:26:21to to determine when these measures are

5:26:24warranted to the satisfaction of the

5:26:27administrator.

5:26:28Condition 20, an executed shared use

5:26:31parking agreement for the um Reno Sparks

5:26:35Convention. um RSC CVA lot C or an

5:26:40equivalent minimum of 845 off-site

5:26:44spaces must be made available prior to

5:26:47the stadium cert certification or

5:26:49certificate of occupancy

5:26:52as read in the record. And finally,

5:26:55condition 21, at the time of the

5:26:57building permit, an updated noise study

5:26:59must show that the project does not

5:27:01increase existing noise levels. And with

5:27:04that, I can make the findings.

5:27:07>> Commissioner Berkin.

5:27:09>> Um, however, I do have a question

5:27:11though. Um, in the original language,

5:27:14uh, Commissioner GR and everyone else,

5:27:16there was reference to the regional

5:27:18planning commission. Was that captured

5:27:19in this latest one?

5:27:24>> Uh, Commissioner Bera, give staff just a

5:27:26moment to go back and look for that real

5:27:28quick.

5:27:32Um,

5:27:33>> Commissioner Visera, I think you were

5:27:34referencing the master plan amendment

5:27:36and zoning map amendment item. Uh, that

5:27:38that is subject to conformance by the

5:27:40regional planning commission as any

5:27:41master plan amendment would be.

5:27:43>> You're right. You're right. I just had

5:27:44both since we had them bundled at one

5:27:47point uh for conversation. All right.

5:27:49Thank you.

5:27:50>> And Mr. Vice Chair, if I may just

5:27:52clarify for the record. So the motion

5:27:53that was provided overhead, I just want

5:27:55to clarify that the condition 15 and 17

5:27:58are indicated with the updates overhead,

5:28:01right? The the the highlighted updates

5:28:03there. And then condition 20 and

5:28:05condition 21 would be new conditions

5:28:07that are not included in the staff

5:28:08report. I just want to make sure the

5:28:09record reflects that.

5:28:10>> Wonderful. Thank you, Miss Knox.

5:28:13>> Okay, so I had a motion by Commissioner

5:28:15Delvr and a second by Commissioner Bera.

5:28:18Um all those in favor, we

5:28:20>> have discussion, chair.

5:28:21>> Oh, sure. Go ahead. And Mr. McCoy,

5:28:23>> Commissioner McCoy, I just want to thank

5:28:25everybody for working on condition 21. I

5:28:27really uh really think that was a a good

5:28:31kind of avenue to try to explore. Um I'm

5:28:33still going to be a no vote. My concern

5:28:35is that the you know, noise study should

5:28:39be presented here to us to review, have

5:28:43uh the public come and ask questions.

5:28:45It's evidence that we should be

5:28:46considering, being able to ask questions

5:28:48on. And so conditioning uh that

5:28:50something exists on the back end when

5:28:52we're no longer in the in the process um

5:28:55doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to

5:28:56me. But I I I respect and and appreciate

5:28:58the the effort with what they were going

5:29:00for, but I just wanted to explain that.

5:29:02So, thank you.

5:29:02>> Thank you, Commissioner McCoy. All

5:29:05right. Um

5:29:07Madame Clerk, you want to do a roll call

5:29:08vote for us, please?

5:29:10>> Absolutely.

5:29:10>> All right.

5:29:11>> Christina Delvar,

5:29:13>> yes.

5:29:15>> Manny Bera,

5:29:17>> uh yes.

5:29:20Yes.

5:29:21>> Thank you. Jacob Williams.

5:29:22>> Yes.

5:29:24>> Sean McCoy.

5:29:25>> No.

5:29:26>> Jan McKenzie.

5:29:28>> Yes.

5:29:29>> Motion passes 4 to one.

5:29:32>> All right. Thank you so much. Thanks for

5:29:34the extra time. Um that concludes item

5:29:37D6. We will move on to item E business

5:29:41items if we have any.

5:29:45I'll give you a second.

5:29:49I don't believe we have any business

5:29:50items.

5:29:51>> Okay. All right. Moving on from item uh

5:29:53item E, uh we'll move to item F.

5:29:55Truckucky Meadows Regional Planning

5:29:56Lison on report uh discussion only. And

5:30:00I was aware that you might make that for

5:30:01us. Okay, sure. Mrs. Knox, thank you.

5:30:04>> So again, for the record, Lauren Knox,

5:30:05um senior planner. So,

5:30:07>> excuse me. Everyone in chambers, can we

5:30:09keep all conversations outside?

5:30:16Mrs. Knox.

5:30:17>> Okay. So, um the regional planning

5:30:20commission met on September 24th. All of

5:30:23the items on their agenda were approved

5:30:25by the regional planning commission. But

5:30:27of note for this body, um ones that were

5:30:30related to things you might have looked

5:30:31at or should be aware of. The LEDera

5:30:33item um that was a Reno related case

5:30:36that required a tier designation through

5:30:38the regional plan amendment process that

5:30:40was approved. Also of note to this body,

5:30:42the uh regional planning commission

5:30:44adopted the 2026 Wo County consensus

5:30:48forecasts. So that is kind of our

5:30:50consistent reflection of population

5:30:52estimates that we all all of our

5:30:54jurisdictions here um within Wo County,

5:30:56Sparks, and Reno use for our our

5:30:58planning purposes.

5:31:00The RPC also reviewed the annual updates

5:31:02to the regional plan and this included

5:31:04the incorporation of the new consensus

5:31:06forecast, some mapping amendments, um

5:31:08heat mitigation related items to be in

5:31:11conformance with AB96 and some new

5:31:14school approval um process requirements.

5:31:17So I will say though this item through

5:31:19the planning commission was was

5:31:21recommended for approval to the regional

5:31:23planning governing board who um pulled

5:31:26the item from their agenda. So that is

5:31:27not complete yet. this regional plan

5:31:29amendment item just so anyone's aware on

5:31:31this board if you're also on that

5:31:33planning commission. Um I I anticipate

5:31:36that that's going to come through in a

5:31:37future regional planning governing board

5:31:39meeting. So those are really the updates

5:31:41from that particular item. Um happy to

5:31:45answer any questions if there are any.

5:31:46>> I have a quick question regarding the

5:31:48nominations for the regional planning

5:31:52committee. I don't know that that has

5:31:54happened yet through city council. The

5:31:58question was about the city council's

5:31:59appointments to regional planning

5:32:00commission. Yes.

5:32:01>> Yes. They moved to appoint Commissioner

5:32:05McCoy to the partial position, I

5:32:07believe, and they moved to appoint

5:32:09Commissioner McKenzie to the full

5:32:10position.

5:32:13>> Interesting.

5:32:14>> And just one last piece, the next

5:32:16regional planning commission meeting

5:32:18will be on November 2nd utilizing their

5:32:20reserve date. Thanks.

5:32:22>> All right. Thanks, Miss Knox.

5:32:24um puts us item G, future agenda items.

5:32:28Any

5:32:30from this body?

5:32:32Okay. Um puts us right back into item H.

5:32:36Public comment. Madame clerk.

5:32:39>> Thank you, chair. We have three public

5:32:41comments registered in person tonight.

5:32:42We're going to start with Brie Casper,

5:32:44then Josh Aber, then Mark Kersian.

5:32:49>> Welcome back.

5:32:50>> Thank you so much. Um, I really

5:32:52appreciate all your patience and your

5:32:53due diligence today in listening to all

5:32:55of the presentations. Um, I do have a

5:32:59future agenda item I would like to

5:33:01request. Um, so again, for the record,

5:33:04my name is Elizabeth Brie Casper. I live

5:33:06604 feet from the Keystone Data Center.

5:33:10This is my second time standing before

5:33:12this committee politely requesting that

5:33:14the planning staff conduct a a holistic

5:33:16comprehensive review of Sentra's

5:33:18Keystone data center. Since the original

5:33:22conditional use permit was evaluated and

5:33:24approved in January 2025, subsequent

5:33:27building department submissions and

5:33:29utility demands reveal the project's

5:33:31infrastructure layout and resource

5:33:32footprints have shifted by well over the

5:33:3610% threshold. Under title 18 of the

5:33:39Reno Annexation and Land Development

5:33:41Code, variations of this magnitude

5:33:44legally trigger a major deviation

5:33:46application. They cannot be handled via

5:33:49administrative building permits. I

5:33:52personally believe the city is too close

5:33:54to this and needs the planning staff to

5:33:57step in. Because the city has allowed

5:33:59these changes to proceed unvetted, the

5:34:02project has triggered severe

5:34:03neighborhood impacts. Due to these

5:34:05ongoing violations, I'm formally

5:34:08requesting the planning commission

5:34:09schedule a public hearing to revoke

5:34:11Sentra's conditional use permit on the

5:34:13grounds of chronic nuisance and code

5:34:16violations.

5:34:17This project is no longer what this body

5:34:19approved January 15, 2025 and its

5:34:23unmititigated impacts warrant immediate

5:34:25permanent revocation.

5:34:29Um this yeah this envision of the code

5:34:33is not an isolated incident as detailed

5:34:36today by Dr. Alicia Barber in the Barber

5:34:39briefs. Public records reveal that the

5:34:41city of Reno has been systematically

5:34:43failing to provide complete developer

5:34:45project applications to its reviewing

5:34:47bodies and the public. This is a direct

5:34:50violation of our own land development

5:34:52procedures when the city cuts corners

5:34:54and it strips the community of its right

5:34:56to due process and allows developers to

5:34:59construct projects that actively harm

5:35:01surrounding neighborhoods.

5:35:03I am asking you today to schedule a

5:35:05public hearing to review the revocation

5:35:08of the Centra's conditional use permit

5:35:10at 265

5:35:12um due to chronic nuisance and major

5:35:14project deviations. I'd like to request

5:35:17some feedback on when and if this could

5:35:20be uh provided that the public can

5:35:22anticipate a scheduled public hearing on

5:35:24this matter. I'm not sure if you're

5:35:26allowed to speak to me during my public

5:35:28comment, but um I would love to hear if

5:35:30this could be something that could be

5:35:32agendaized in the near future.

5:35:36>> Yeah, it's not a back and forth

5:35:37discussion, but I'm I'm sure some of us

5:35:39wouldn't mind after the meeting to hear

5:35:42what your thoughts are and then figure

5:35:43out if that's something that we have the

5:35:45authority to do.

5:35:46>> Great. Thank you so much.

5:35:48>> All right. Thanks for your comment.

5:35:49>> Thank you for your time. Appreciate you

5:35:50all.

5:35:54Next up is Josh Aar followed by Mark

5:35:56Kersinman.

5:36:02>> All right, once again, Josh Abear for

5:36:03the record. Uh, I don't have anything

5:36:04prepared, so this is just off the top of

5:36:06my head. Uh, first off, I I also have a

5:36:08PhD in physics, so it [snorts] was a

5:36:11little frustrating for me to listen to

5:36:13the sound discussion. Uh, I do want to

5:36:15let you know that a 3.7 decel increase

5:36:18is about a 30% increase in sound

5:36:23perception. Like you we will perceive

5:36:24that as 30% louder. It's not a it's not

5:36:27a lot, but neither is it imperceptible.

5:36:30So presenting it as imperceptible is not

5:36:31correct. Also, we don't know anything

5:36:33about how that sound was modeled. They

5:36:35said they pointed speakers, what was it?

5:36:3798 speakers at the field. We don't know

5:36:40what level those speakers were set at.

5:36:42Um, we don't know what the sound of a

5:36:45full stadium full of people will be

5:36:47because that sound will be going out in

5:36:49all directions. And we also don't know

5:36:51when these measurements are made. If

5:36:52we're talking about the freeway, then

5:36:54we're talking about probably its loudest

5:36:56point like during the morning and

5:36:57evening commutes. But when you're

5:36:59talking about events, when are those

5:37:00events taking place? They're taking

5:37:01place on the weekends. They might be

5:37:02taking place in the evenings. So people

5:37:04in those neighborhoods are already

5:37:05significantly impacted by sound because

5:37:07of the freeway. So I think we really

5:37:09need a lot more detail about the nature

5:37:11of that particular sound study so we

5:37:13really know what the real impact on the

5:37:15people will be and make sure they're

5:37:16actually modeling that sound properly so

5:37:18that they do fall within the code. Um so

5:37:21I'm working backwards. I wanted to

5:37:23mention I on the on the discussion about

5:37:26the skyways I honestly found it a little

5:37:28bit shocking that uh Leah from staff

5:37:31appeared to be extremely partial towards

5:37:33this project. Uh my understanding is

5:37:36that staff is supposed to be giving an

5:37:37impartial objective presentation. There

5:37:40were a number of times where she said we

5:37:42as in she was part of like the developer

5:37:45team. So I found that very strange. And

5:37:47then the last comment that I wanted to

5:37:49make has to do with the master plan

5:37:51because I love cities. I'm an urbanist

5:37:53guy. I want to see Reno develop really

5:37:55well. You know, downtown is really

5:37:57struggling and a lot of people like wave

5:37:59their hands at the master plan like

5:38:00we're going to do this. It's going to

5:38:01create development for us. But these

5:38:03closed casino ecosystems, they don't do

5:38:05that. We know that for a fact. We see

5:38:08that with the row. They talk about

5:38:09peppermill. People stay within the

5:38:11peppermill. People stay within the

5:38:12Atlantis. This other big project that's

5:38:14being done. People are going to stay

5:38:15within there. Yes, it creates jobs. It

5:38:17creates a destination for people to go,

5:38:19but it does nothing for the surrounding

5:38:20environment. And when we're talking

5:38:22about downtown, there's a very specific

5:38:24vision in the master plan. I think Reno

5:38:26has a great master plan to have a

5:38:28walkable, mixeduse, vibrant downtown.

5:38:32So, I would like to see the planning

5:38:34commission try to work with the

5:38:36developers, specifically when it comes

5:38:37to downtown to have developments that

5:38:39are more open to the community so that

5:38:41it actually does activate things. Just

5:38:44sticking a statue behind a fence is not

5:38:47activation. We've all been downtown.

5:38:49There's nobody down there. And if it's

5:38:50all playing fields and event venues,

5:38:52there's not going to be anybody down

5:38:54there. We need more life down there in

5:38:56order to make downtown what it could be.

5:38:59Thank you.

5:39:00>> Thank you.

5:39:02Thank you. Last up is Mark Kersinman.

5:39:08>> Mark Kersinman.

5:39:11I am also requesting a revocation

5:39:13[clears throat] of the a revocation

5:39:15hearing for Centra's CUP or a holistic

5:39:18staff review. Since the original

5:39:20conditional use permit was approved in

5:39:22January of 25, the scope of this project

5:39:25has changed extensively. The resources

5:39:27have increased dramatically well over

5:39:30the 10% threshold needed to trigger a

5:39:32major deviation application. The city

5:39:34has allowed these changes to happen

5:39:36without accountability or due diligence.

5:39:39It has ignored procedial procedural

5:39:41negligence, code deviations, and steps

5:39:44to keep review bodies in the public

5:39:46informed. This project is nowhere close

5:39:49to the original project approved and

5:39:51should be revoked. We have also put

5:39:53together a presentation of all of the

5:39:55deviations for this project if any of

5:39:57you are interested in listening to it.

5:40:00Thank you.

5:40:01>> Thank you.

5:40:02>> With that, I do not have any additional

5:40:04public comment registered for this item.

5:40:09>> Commissioner Bisera, I'd like to make a

5:40:11quick uh public comment if I may.

5:40:12>> Go ahead, Commissioner.

5:40:14>> Thank you. I I just Manny Bera uh

5:40:16planning commissioner for the record.

5:40:18Just a quick note of appreciation to Dr.

5:40:21Alicia Barber for recently raising that

5:40:24critical gap in point of procedure

5:40:25regarding our meeting packets and just

5:40:27ensuring that they're complete with the

5:40:29required documents moving forward that

5:40:31are beneficial to this body, the public

5:40:33and applicants as required under Reno

5:40:35Municipal Code. So, it's always good to

5:40:37have a second set of eyes and

5:40:39appreciation to her.

5:40:43>> All right. Thank you, Commissioner

5:40:44Bisera. Any last comments? Um I guess a

5:40:48comment I have is to the um enforcement

5:40:54of the

5:40:55um data center constraints and

5:40:57conditions we put in place. How does

5:40:59that

5:41:00how does that work? Is that that's a

5:41:03city enforcement? Do we

5:41:06because we can't call a public

5:41:09>> Yeah. I I think um Commissioner Door was

5:41:12going to ask um of the two

5:41:15representatives of that that maybe they

5:41:16send us an email with their request and

5:41:18then we can send that on to staff and

5:41:20legal and then figure out what

5:41:21>> okay

5:41:22>> what what it is. I I didn't know another

5:41:23way to deal with it. So I thought if

5:41:24they reach out to us then we could

5:41:26forward it on is that

5:41:29>> well that's not necessarily the

5:41:31>> we don't have any more discussion

5:41:32periods open for this meeting. Miss

5:41:34Casper did submit her comments in

5:41:36writing via email. So, they've been

5:41:37attached um to item A3 as general public

5:41:42comment and you all received it in your

5:41:44maybe 5:00 p.m. distribution. Okay.

5:41:46>> Um and [snorts] staff has her comments

5:41:48as well.

5:41:49>> Perfect. Thank you.

5:41:49>> Yes, Kelly.

5:41:51>> Okay, last motion for adjournment. Just

5:41:53need one.

5:41:54>> Commissioner McCoy, motion to adjurnn.

5:41:56>> Right. Commissioner McCoy.

5:41:58>> Commissioner Delvier second.

5:41:59>> And a second by Commissioner DelviR. All

5:42:01those in favor? Hi.

5:42:02>> H I