Planning commission denies truck storage yard permit after staff cites unresolved drainage and code enforcement issues

The Reno City Planning Commission on July 15 denied a conditional use permit for a truck terminal and storage yard (case LDC26‑00020) after staff said the applicant had not submitted the plans necessary to verify compliance with code, especially where unpermitted grading and disturbance to a major drainage way are involved.

Leah Piccati told commissioners the application had been pending since October 2025 and had required multiple extensions; staff said the applicant had not provided final plans addressing parking, curb/gutter/sidewalk, drainage and fencing despite repeated requests and that there is an active code enforcement history for the site. "Without plans, staff cannot verify compatibility, safety, access, or infrastructure compliance," Piccati said, explaining that the project affects a major drainage way and raised public‑safety concerns.

Applicant representative Hugh Ezell disputed aspects of staff’s account and recounted early conversations in which staff advised the applicant to apply for a truck terminal and suggested a phased approach that would allow a future building. Ezell said the owner has limited financial resources, has hired an engineer and submitted a drainage and grading plan that he said the city refused to accept; he disputed staff’s cost assumptions and argued Peavine Peak Road is private property or an easement and therefore that some public‑works upgrades staff requested are not appropriate.

Commissioners questioned whether there was an alternative path to permit continued lawful operation while resolving the outstanding infrastructure needs. Development review manager Douglas Buck said road and drainage improvements consistent with the public‑works design manual are required when properties are developed or used for new commercial operations, regardless of ownership, and noted ongoing efforts elsewhere to improve the road corridor. Legal counsel confirmed NDOT has projects in planning stages in the region but that the core permitting and code compliance requirements remain in force.

Commissioner Belto moved to deny the conditional use permit for noncompliance with applicable findings; the motion carried unanimously. Staff read appeal instructions to the record; the applicant was informed of the appeal window and could pursue the required engineering, plan submittals and a new or revised application that addresses drainage and parking improvements.

Next steps: applicant may revise submittal to provide required engineering, parking and drainage plans and/or pursue an appeal to City Council within the specified timeframe.