May 17, 2021 The Week Ahead
May 17, 2021 The Week Ahead
Public meetings, updates, and resources to help keep you informed
Happy Monday, everyone! No lengthy single-issue analysis from me today, just updates of prior topics of discussion along with information on some upcoming meetings and valuable resources to check out. So grab that third cup of coffee and let’s dive in.
PROJECT UPDATES
Proposed Jacobs Development Agreement/Neon Line District
There was no explanation given, but the proposed ordinance change discussed in my prior Brief involving the City’s Sewer Connection Fee Credit Policy was abruptly pulled from the May 12 City Council agenda (Item E.1) that morning. There were about 20 public comments in opposition, none in favor. Let’s all keep an eye on this one, in case it comes back in this or a different form. In the meantime, I’m hearing nothing about that proposed Development Agreement, which I wrote about on April 13 and May 2, but we should all feel free to continue to convey our thoughts about that to City Council and the City Manager since it’s surely being heavily discussed privately.
6000 Plumas Street
This is the project on the former site of the Lakeridge Tennis Club, which I initially discussed on March 15. The Planning Commission’s approval of the 314-unit condo project was appealed by residents and brought to City Council on April 28. In that meeting, a 4-3 Council majority (Delgado, Jardon, Reese, Weber) upheld the Planning Commission’s approval and denied the appeal. The final tally for public comment was 123 in support of the appeal, one opposed, and eight concerned. Recaps of the meeting were published by the community groups Washoe Residents for Appropriate Planning and Save Our Reno. Barring any further legal or procedural action, the project will now move forward.
Lakeridge Place Phase II
The proposal to rezone the Lakeridge Golf Course Driving Range, discussed in my March 15 Brief, would recategorize the driving range from Parks, Greenways, and Open Space (PGOS) to Single-Family Neighborhood (SF6) to enable the construction of 46 townhouses. It was recommended for denial by City staff, and also by the Planning Commission in their April 7 meeting.
In order to approve an item, the Commission has to make a series of specific findings, and in this case, the planning commissioners (unanimously) could not make findings that require any change to be consistent with the Master Plan and for any rezoning to “promote the conservation of open space and the protection of other natural and scenic resources from unreasonable impairment.” You can go back and read the journal recap (it’s item 5.3) to get a sense of their discussion, and watch the video.
Because the Planning Commission’s votes on Master Plan and Zoning Map amendments are just recommendations to City Council, that’s where this item is headed on June 9. Before that, however, this project will be discussed at the May 18 meeting of the Ward 2 Neighborhood Advisory Board (NAB), which is revving back into action (virtually, anyway). Normally, the project would have been reviewed by the NAB before Planning Commission, but of course the NABs have not met since last spring. More on the NAB meeting below. [UPDATE: The 5/18 Ward 2 NAB meeting has been rescheduled for May 25. Agenda here.]
700 Riverside Drive
Site preparation for the planned apartment building at 700 Riverside Drive, in the heart of the historic Powning Conservation District, is already underway, but construction proceeds at the developer’s risk, since as of press time there has been no decision following the hearing of the building permit appeals on May 4.
I watched several hours of that 7-1/2 hour hearing, and I can tell you that the legal and procedural issues at hand are far more complex than many might realize, involving a myriad of factors including street abandonments and maintenance, public easements, parking requirements, and more. It’s a serious and complicated matter.
I won’t rehash the details of the project, which I wrote about in prior posts on March 4, March 8, and April 5, but I do want to say something about the nature of some of the public and private discussions about it, because they should be of grave concern to anyone with an abiding interest in respectful deliberations about development in a time of rapid growth and change.
The level of misinformation and misrepresentation of historic preservation, its principles, and its advocates that is swirling about with respect to this issue has been surprising even to me, and I’ve seen a lot of inaccuracies being spread about preservation in my 20 years of working on preservation policy and advocacy, locally, statewide, and across the country with the National Park Service.
Those raising concerns about physical aspects of this project have been labeled by some as “NIMBYs,” as affluent and intolerant elites, as anti-growth, anti-housing, anti-renter, and even discriminatory. Concern for ensuring the compatibility of infill development with the unique character of one of Reno’s two designated Conservation Districts—a community value embedded in the City’s Historic Plan, Master Plan, and City Code—has been painted as resistance to any kind of change, as a failure to understand the neighborhood’s true character, or as evidence of some misguided (and entirely imagined) belief that historic districts should remain unfixed “museums.”
None of these characterizations are accurate. And playing into those false depictions not only misrepresents the valid concerns that area residents (who include far more than this project’s immediate neighbors and preservation advocates) have about specific aspects of this building’s planned design, form, siting, and massing—but it only perpetuates division. It’s easy (and all too common) to dismiss the opinions of someone you have chosen to depict as intolerant, ignorant, or irrational. But it’s seriously not all that hard to make an effort to understand what others are actually saying and try to find some common ground. You just have to be willing to try.
The Reno News & Review published an excellent overview of some of the key issues related to this project on May 1. And the President of the Historic Reno Preservation Society (on whose Board I proudly serve), recently contributed a One View column to the Reno Gazette-Journal that counters some of the most glaring misconceptions of the Powning Conservation District and its historic character, reaffirming what many of us have been saying all along—that it’s entirely possible for a new multi-story apartment building, even in the very heart of this district, to be designed in a way that is sensitive to the City’s established vision for this special mixed-use riverfront neighborhood.
Nothing demonstrates greater sensitivity to context (and community) than acknowledging the concerns of others about the potential impact of a project on its surrounding environment, admitting what you perhaps don’t understand about those concerns, and expressing a willingness to engage in a dialogue about them, not just stating that they are unfounded or wrong. So let’s try starting there, shall we?
Upcoming Land Development Projects
As I’ve mentioned before, one of the best ways to get advance notice of applications for development projects that are subject to any kind of discretionary review is the e-newsletter published every few weeks by the City of Reno’s Community Development department. You can sign up for this newsletter (and many others) on the City’s newsletter page. This one is called Development Projects, but you can also sign up for NAB updates, information on upcoming City Council meetings, and more.
The latest edition, which can be viewed as a webpage here, features applications for seven new projects in Wards 1, 2, 4, and 5. The e-newsletter provides clear information on what the projects are, where they’re located, when advance comments are due (in order to be provided to applicants prior to any public reviews, where public comment will also be solicited), and when they’ll be coming in front of the Planning Commission or City Council. They also list what development projects will be heard at the next meetings of those bodies.
The Community Development Department has also created a fantastic webpage specifically for Land Development Projects, with links to previous editions of these newsletters, a map of where upcoming projects are located, and a table providing information about them and links to their full applications.
UPCOMING MEETINGS
May 18: Ward 2 Neighborhood Advisory Board
[UPDATE: The 5/18 Ward 2 NAB meeting has been rescheduled for May 25. Below is my original post from 5/17.]
Back in January I wrote a post about the importance of the Neighborhood Advisory Boards (NABs) and my growing concern that they had not met, even virtually, since March of 2020. As I mentioned above, the first NAB meeting of 2021 has finally been scheduled, and it’s for Ward 2, meeting on Tuesday, May 18 at 5:30 p.m. [update: This meeting is now scheduled for Tuesday, May 25 at 5:30. New agenda here.]
The two development projects on the agenda are Lakeridge Place Phase 2 (see above) and a Zoning Map Amendment that would change a parcel near Warren Way & West Peckham Lane from single-family residential to multi-family residential. Click here for the agenda which includes information on how to register to watch the meeting via Zoom and submit any desired public comment.
There are still five vacancies remaining on the Ward 2 NAB, and other NABs have vacancies, too, so if you’re interested, you can apply on the City’s website here. If you don’t know which ward you live in, consult the online map here.
Big thanks to Councilmember Naomi Duerr of Ward 2 for bringing back the Ward 2 NAB, and let’s all hope the other wards will quickly follow!
May 19: Reno City Council
On Wednesday morning (May 19) there’s a Joint Special Meeting of the Reno City Council and Reno Redevelopment Agency (which is also comprised of the Mayor and Council) to adopt the Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 including tax levies and adopting a new fee schedule. You can view the staff report for the City Council portion here and for the Redevelopment Agency portion here.
Some might find the report on the two Redevelopment Project Areas (RDA 1 & RDA 2) of particular interest, as RDA 1 continues to be in major debt and is slated to receive a loan from RDA 2. I’m just going to reiterate my previous position that the citizen Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (RAAB) should be reinstated after being unceremoniously dissolved sometime over the past few years. Its primary function was to recommend actions to be taken by the Redevelopment Agency, and that’s not a citizen board or function that should be eliminated just because the RDAs don’t have a lot of funds to disperse.
Oh, and GREAT NEWS! The City Council is reportedly to resume in-person meetings in June, which means their regular May 26 meeting should be the last one to occur via Zoom. Can I get an Amen?
May 19: Reno Planning Commission
The agenda for the Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday, May 19 includes a number of items relating to tentative maps and re-division of parcels in the Daybreak development and a few industrial sites. Click here for the agenda and materials.
May 27: Downtown Reno Partnership Town Hall
The Downtown Reno Partnership will be holding its next (virtual) quarterly town hall on May 27th at 5:30 p.m. You can attend via Zoom by registering here. As I’ve written before, the DRP is Reno’s nonprofit downtown Business District (BID). It’s not a government entity, but its marketing and economic development arms work to promote investment and interest in the downtown area, and their updates are always interesting. You can sign up for their newsletter here.
That’s it for today. As always, you can view my previous e-newsletters, with more context, analysis, and tips, on my Substack site, https://thebarberbrief.substack.com/. Thanks for reading, and have a great week!