Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision Tentative Parcel Map topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lyon County planning commission approves 3-way split of Mason Valley parcel
Summary
The planning commission approved a tentative parcel map to divide an approximately 196.03-acre Mason Valley parcel into three lots, the smallest about 20.49 acres, subject to 12 conditions of approval; vote was 5-0.
The Lyon County Planning Commission on a unanimous 5-0 vote approved a tentative parcel map to divide an approximately 196.03-acre property in Mason Valley into three parcels, the smallest measuring about 20.49 acres.
The commission’s action forwards approval for the tentative parcel map submitted by Essen Properties LLC (listed in materials as SE/SC Properties LLC in some places) for the property at 460 Miller Lane (APN 014-321-21; PLZ-2025-040), subject to 12 conditions of approval. Commissioner Audrey Allen made the motion; Commissioner Merritt seconded. The motion passed 5-0.
The staff presentation described the proposal as a division of an existing agricultural parcel that contains two residences and agricultural uses. According to staff, Parcel B contains an existing residence served by a well and an individual septic system currently shared between two residences; Parcel C contains another residence that would need a new well and septic if separated. The largest parcel (about 118 acres as shown in the application materials) would remain in agricultural use. Staff said the tentative parcel map is governed by Lyon County Code (Title 15) review criteria for tentative parcel maps and that the proposed parcels meet minimum lot-size and frontage standards for the R-20 / RR-20 standard into which the property converts under Title 15.
Staff noted one constraint for any future additional development: the larger agricultural portion lies within a flood zone and would require an elevation certificate and development plan for any new structures. Mason Valley Fire Protection District review would also be required for future development. Staff told the commission it did not receive substantive comments from reviewing agencies and characterized the map as “a pretty straightforward tentative parcel map.”
No members of the public spoke on the item and the applicant was present online but made no public statements at the hearing.
The commission’s approval record notes the action is a tentative parcel map only; any future construction or commercial change would require separate permits and reviews. The motion and findings cited the county’s tentative parcel map review criteria in Lyon County Code (Title 15) and the master plan agricultural designation for the area.
The commission recorded the action as approved with conditions; the packet identifies the APN and the 12 conditions of approval to be satisfied prior to final map submittal.
Looking ahead, staff said final engineering review will occur before final map acceptance to avoid substantive post-approval changes and to ensure required utilities, access easements and any floodplain documentation are in place.
