Commission rearranges Envision Washoe 2040 implementation priorities; housing stays top, equine rules and agritourism rise

Washoe County planning staff asked the Board of County Commissioners on Oct. 21 to confirm a revised implementation priority list for the Envision Washoe 2040 master plan and to adopt additional items that emerged from the 2025 Nevada legislative session.

Planning Director Kelly Mullen reviewed progress since the plan’s adoption — changes to allow more “missing middle” housing (triplexes, quadplexes), easier accessory dwelling unit (ADU) rules, updated multifamily standards and upcoming ordinances to incentivize senior housing. She said short‑term legislative priorities include direction to allow multifamily and mixed‑use housing on commercially zoned parcels and an expedited review pathway for attainable housing.

Mullen recommended removing staffing and Tahoe area plan items from the county’s priority list because staffing had been addressed in the fiscal cycle and the Tahoe area plan work was complete. She proposed adding two items created or clarified by the Legislature (a required heat‑mitigation plan and other mandates) and making “public noticing and engagement” a higher priority to ensure earlier neighborhood input into projects.

Commissioner discussion and public comments prompted a reordering. Commissioners agreed to keep countywide attainable/affordable housing as the top priority. By consensus they moved equine‑business code updates (commercial regulations affecting horse stables, trainers and boarding operations) to second and agritourism code development to third, citing ongoing hardships for small rural agricultural businesses operating under outdated rules. Heat‑mitigation work (statutorily mandated and time‑sensitive) was placed next, followed by dark‑skies and then public‑noticing reforms. Several residents and business owners from rural areas urged expedited action on equine business changes and agritourism, saying the current permitting path (special use permits) is often infeasible and that code language needs modernization.

Ending: The board voted to adopt the revised priority order and asked planning staff to return with implementation timelines; commissioners also requested staff produce a clearer project schedule (Gantt‑style) that estimates time‑to‑completion for each priority and to provide regular progress updates.