Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the 5 Bridges Tentative Map topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission forwards recommendation for 211‑lot 5 Bridges tentative map to city council

Sparks Planning Commission · March 6, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission recommended approval of a tentative map for Villages 3 and 7 of the 5 Bridges development — a 211‑lot single‑family subdivision on 53.75 acres — subject to findings and 19 conditions including evidence of sewer capacity and potential off‑site road improvements.

The Sparks Planning Commission voted to forward a recommendation to the city council for a tentative map (STM25‑0004) that would create a 211‑lot single‑family subdivision across Villages 3 and 7 of the 5 Bridges development.

Danny Ray, senior planner, outlined the proposal as 53.75 acres with lots ranging from about 5,025 to 11,287 square feet and an overall gross density of 4.2 dwelling units per acre; staff said the density is lower than the comprehensive‑plan minimum but consistent with SF‑6 zoning, which takes precedence where zoning and plan differ. Ray said 10.67 acres are to remain common open space and that 128 lots would use small‑lot standards under the municipal code.

The staff presentation described required findings (T1–T12), infrastructure expectations and conditions, estimated domestic water demand for the 211 units (about 101.5 acre‑feet per year), and an estimated sewage generation of about 189,900 gallons per day; Ray noted the applicant must demonstrate adequate sewer capacity before final map approval and that final stormwater and drainage plans and geotechnical reports will be required.

Eric Hastie, representing the applicant (Wood Rogers), told commissioners the current submission is largely consistent with prior approvals and the development agreement, and that only minor changes were proposed compared with the previously approved tentative map.

After questions about timing and off‑site improvements, a commissioner moved to forward a recommendation of approval adopting findings T1–T12 and subject to conditions 1–19; the motion passed and the item will advance to the city council for final action.

Staff noted fire protection considerations: portions of Villages 3 and 7 are outside the four‑minute fire response standard and dwelling units could be required to include sprinklers unless future fire‑station construction brings response times within the threshold.