On Wednesday, April 13 the Planning Commissioners heard three hours of testimony covering 10 different applications, most notably a parcel map request for Sky Ranch, a special use permit and variance request for a duplex in a commercial zone, and an outdoor storage expansion request for New Millennium Building Systems. On the agenda, that evening were three renewals, six new applications, and one termination, all were approved.
Derek Coulter spoke on behalf of Haneva LLC for their Sky Ranch development consisting of 160 acres located at the west end of Wade Lane where it intersects with Moody Lane. The parcel map application was for Village A, the first parcel of four in the original Planned Unit Development. Per the County Planning Department's staff report, the parcel map for Village A will establish the initial alignment of Wade Lane where it will extend through the property. The proposed 120’ wide road easement is currently centered on the property lines of the new lots. The PUD dictates that Village A be developed first along with the first segment of the Wade Lane extension. The report stated that the creation of the three villages is important for the county because it establishes the initial alignment of Wade Lane as it is extended west into the Sky Ranch development. The property is currently used for agriculture, and the Wade Lane alignment will disrupt the existing irrigation layout so modifications will be made for continued irrigation. The report further stated that very little alteration of the neighborhood will result from the proposal.
Leslie Beach of 6755 Reno Highway submitted an application for a special use permit and a variance. Her property is zoned C-2 but early in its history, it held multiple residential dwellings including the existing building. That building is the only one remaining and was converted to business use over 20 years ago. The most recent being the closed Red Door Store secondhand shop. Per the Planning Department's staff report, the property lost its residential non-conforming status long ago. It also stated the applicant recently converted the building back to a single-family residence, which was not allowed, resulting in extensive code enforcement and other legal proceedings. The applicant is now working to make the residence into a conforming use but has only two options: establish a mini-storage business which would allow a manager’s residence or turn the residence into a multi-family dwelling which is currently allowed in commercial zones. The multi-family option is the one chosen by Beach, especially because the upcoming code change to establish the new R-3 zoning district will prohibit multi-family dwellings in commercial zones. The staff report continued that this application is vested under the current law but if it is not completed, and the permit expires a new application cannot be submitted for residential use. However, if the duplex is approved, it will become a legal non-conforming use under the new R-3 zoning similar to others on Reno Highway. It may continue to exist as such but may not be expanded and will lose its nonconforming use status should it stop being a residential duplex. The duplex will be created by attaching an 800-square-foot addition to the east side of the existing residence and will face north to south. The variance is needed to reduce the front yard setback requirement by five feet to allow room for the length of the new addition.
New Millennium Building Systems submitted an application to expand the outdoor storage area to the east of their factory. All or part of the expansion area is planned to be graveled for truck and forklift driving surface, as well as for dust control. The existing rail lines will be extended to a point closer to the north property line. Fencing was also proposed around the expanded section of the site. It was also stated that the expansion is not meant to accommodate more factory production, but to increase outdoor holding capacity for completed products awaiting delivery to customers. Use of a sound barrier was discussed along the north and east edges of the site that faces an adjacent residence in an attempt to minimize potential noise from activity in the expansion area including rail car movement and loading, and forklift and truck activity moving fabricated items. However, its actual effectiveness was further questioned during the hearing, with the applicants stating that a barrier that would cost over $70,000 would not provide the result the county suggested it would. It was finally agreed that if noise emanating from the expansion area created a noise nuisance, over and above the level of noise already in existence, it would be addressed at that time. The county does not have a standard for maximum noise decibels.
Comment
Comments