Planning commission approves Stone Village amendment allowing more parking, reducing common open space

The Reno Planning Commission on Monday approved a condition amendment for the Stone Village apartment project that increases on-site parking and reduces a common landscape area.

The commission voted 5–2 to approve the amendment to LDC25-00067, which replaces an earlier exhibit with a new site plan that adds 108 parking spaces (raising total on-site parking from 379 to 487) and reduces the currently proposed common landscape/open space from 5.2 acres to 3.2 acres. The commission added a condition requiring either written consent from neighboring owners for grading close to residential properties or conformance with a specified exhibit (Exhibit E) describing an alternate approach.

Why it matters: The applicant said changed market demand and limited transit access justify more parking on site, while opponents warned that added pavement could worsen local heat and reduce the quality of life for adjacent homeowners. The commission majority concluded the change meets applicable code findings; dissenting commissioners said the amendment conflicted with emerging local priorities on urban heat mitigation.

Staff presentation and developer rationale Grace Macadine, senior management analyst for the city, told commissioners the amendment modifies Condition 1 of the earlier major site plan (LDC22-000016). She said the amendment reflects field conditions discovered during construction and aims to address street parking demand; staff found the revised proposal would still meet minimum landscape and open-space requirements under the Reno Municipal Code and recommended approval.

Will Adler, representing Allco Construction and Silver State Government Relations, said the parcel is constrained by an NV Energy transmission-line easement and that the southern part of the approximately 11.46-acre site is best suited to surface parking rather than additional housing or vertical construction. Adler described design steps intended to limit visual and noise impacts: lowering the new parking area so it sits at or below the adjacent fence line, adding a double row of trees (deciduous and conifer) for screening, and continuing an existing stone wall to shield the expanded lot.

Neighbor concerns and staff response Several residents spoke in chambers, including Margie Custer, who lives immediately south of the project. Custer said she had expected a 75-foot easement buffer adjacent to her property and described repeated construction noise, bright alarm lights and trailers near her back fence. She said the proposed parking appears to put cars close to her rear yard and that noise and lighting were already disruptive during earlier site activity.

Commissioners questioned staff about urban-heat impacts and the city’s thresholds for requiring additional landscaping when parking exceeds baseline amounts. Macadine explained that the city’s current code imposes added landscaping only after a 150% parking threshold is exceeded; the amendment increases parking to roughly 130% (staff estimated about 128–130% in the hearing) and therefore does not trigger the higher landscaping requirement. She also said a separate state law (an assembly bill referenced in the hearing) will require a master-plan amendment and urban-heat analysis later; that requirement is not yet in force.

Deliberation and vote Commissioner Valto moved to approve the condition amendment, noting unique site constraints and that the amendment would have been supported if presented originally. Commissioner Jacquelyn seconded. In roll-call voting recorded in the transcript, Commissioners David Jockman, Carrie Romer, Alex Felto, Jacob Williams and Tina Gompentini voted yes; Commissioners Manny Becerra and Christina Delviar voted no. The motion passed 5–2.

Ending: Next steps The approval amends the condition so the new exhibit (Exhibit C) is the controlling site plan; the amendment also requires written neighbor consent or conformance with Exhibit E if the developer cannot secure that consent for grading near residences. The applicant and city will incorporate the design and the landscaping measures discussed at the hearing into final construction plans. The commission’s record shows neighbors remain concerned about noise, light and the reduced contiguous common landscape area.