Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends code amendment to conform with AB241, allowing multifamily/mixed‑use by right in commercial zones
Summary
The commission voted to recommend code amendment CA 26001 (bill 379) to align local land-use table with state Assembly Bill 241, moving multifamily and mixed-use residential components to by-right status in commercial zones; commissioners expressed concern about loss of discretionary review and potential traffic impacts.
The Fernley Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that city council adopt code amendment CA 26001 (bill 379), which updates the city's land-use table (FMC 32.06.150 Table 2) to comply with state Assembly Bill 241 by allowing multifamily and mixed-use developments with residential components by right in commercial zones.
Senior Planner Alisa Johansen said the proposed change is narrowly targeted to the use table so multifamily and mixed-use projects are treated as by-right uses in commercial zoning districts, while administrative review and development standards remain in place. "This amendment is required to bring our code into compliance with new state law," Johansen said, adding that administrative review still allows staff to apply development standards before building permits are issued.
Commissioners asked how the change affects the planning commission's ability to address cumulative impacts such as traffic and infrastructure. Commissioner Holt asked what would change procedurally if the amendment passed or failed; Johansen said if the city did not change its code the state law would ultimately invalidate the conflicting local code. "By amending our code rather than having state law invalidate it, we simplify regulatory requirements for both ourselves and our customers," she said.
City Attorney Aaron Mortensen warned of legal risks from failing to conform: "If we did not pass this code amendment... developers who would comply with [AB241] would likely have a basis for litigation against the city," he said, and described the statute's intent to increase multifamily housing supply in commercial areas.
Commissioners expressed reservations about the loss of discretionary review and cumulative-impact controls; Commissioner Wagner asked whether staff could later add a cumulative-impact threshold and was told such an approach would not comply with AB241. Commissioners were advised that other tools such as stricter building and zoning requirements, impact fees or special-assessment districts can address infrastructure needs.
Commissioner Wagner moved to recommend approval of bill 379 associated with CA 26001; Commissioner Williams seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Staff said the amendment will proceed to city council for public hearing and final action in March.
