I appreciate you due diligence! You are grossly inflating the impact of the proposed "Housing Element" on Reno in general. (don't know the Substack response protocols so this will be a run-on sentence). - Reno has allowed up to a fourplex in SF11, 8 and 5 for over 3 years now. Not a single proposal has been filed - partly because owner's don't know the have the option, and mostly because of the CUP requirement kills any owner from applying for granular infill. - Like you, I was shocked at the Planning Commission's expansion of the proposed Ordinance. It was a lot of feel good without understanding how development works financially, and probably a red herring to distract the Council.

- CCRs recorded in Reno after 1975 or so generally limit development to Single Family Residential as defined at that time. Before then no one even considered that anything other than an SFR would be built. Seriously over 90% of the "major zoning change" simply does not exist.. - 100 unit threshold for Planning review is just fine. - PC recommended no parking standards for Affordable units. That is nutso. - This proposal MUST be considered with the Code Cleanup being workshopped currently at the PC. - Alicia and I will continue to disagree on public input vs. code standards and how RMC handles the issues. Fun!

Expand full comment

I'll add my $0.02. I think the zoning changes need to be clearly defined (as you said, particularly when it comes to affordable housing). As it stands now, it looks like a giveaway to real estate developers. We've had that and it doesn't work out well for those in need of housing at affordable prices.

Expand full comment

I agree in principle that public input has its place, but my concern is that the review process more often than not gets exploited in bad faith by those categorically opposed to growth and density, who just want to kill projects. I think zoning code should be the primary means of public control over development patterns, but that it should be simple and permissive, prohibiting clear nuisances without imposing arbitrary limits on unit counts, floor area ratios, etc.

Personally, I have a hard time opposing anything that strikes a blow against the absurdity that is single family zoning. A vibrant, dynamic city is constantly growing and changing. Embedding specific ideas about "neighborhood character" into zoning code, with designated single family zones and tiers of multifamily zones with arbitrary maximum unit counts, seems to me a recipe for stagnation.

Our problem in Reno is too little development, not too much, so while we don't want to write blank checks, I think our stance should be default allow rather than default deny, with only the most reasonable and carefully considered prohibitions. Appreciating our history should not require freezing most of the city in amber out of fear of architectural incompatibility, shadows, traffic, parking, or whatever anti-urban, anti-growth bogeyman one cares to think of.

Expand full comment