Washell County Parcel Map Review Committee meeting of Thursday, March 12th, 2026 to order.

It's 2 04 p.m.

Adriana, can we start the meeting with the call to order and determination of quorum?

Yes.

Rob Pierce.

Present.

Wes Rubio.

Wes Rubio.

Sorry, buttons weren't clicking.

Present.

Thank you.

Wayne Handrock.

Present.

Eric Young.

Here.

And Jen Williamson.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Thanks, Dodge Honor.

We'll move on to the ethics law announcement instructions for providing public comment via Zoom and telephone.

That's normally handled by our deputy DA.

Good afternoon, Chaz Layman, Deputy District Attorney for the record.

Members are reminded that if with respect to any matter or person coming before the committee today, that one, you have received a gift or a loan, two, you have a pecuniary interest.

Three, you have a commitment in a private capacity, such as a family member or as a family employment, business, or similar relationship, or you provided representation or counseling before an agency to a person or entity for compensation within the last year on our matter being considered, then you must disclose that gift loan interest commitment or prior representation at the time the matter is being considered.

And further, please remember to abstain from deliberation or voting on a matter if it is clear that the gift loan interest commitment or prior representation would materially affect the independence of judgment of reasonable person.

Committee members are also reminded that you have uh that you are under the parcel map review review committee bylaws.

If you had any contact outside the meeting with any persons interested in a matter coming before the committee today, you should disclose the nature of that contact at this meeting.

Uh reminder for instructions for public comment.

Um this meeting is being held via Zoom webinar only.

To participate via Zoom, please log into the webinar at the link found on the first page of today's agenda, or you can join by typing zoom.us into your computer's browser.

Clicking join a meeting on the Zoom website and entering the meeting ID 831 3388 3067.

For anyone having computer difficulties, you can also join by telephone by dialing 1669-9009128, entering the meeting ID 831-3388-3067 and pressing pound.

Members of the public may submit public comment via Zoom or by dialing into the meeting by telephone.

Provide public comment via Zoom, log into the webinar at the link on the first page of today's agenda and utilize the raise hand feature during any public comment period to let us know you'd like to provide comment.

To provide public comment via telephone, uh via telephone only, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to mute and unmute.

Thanks.

Thank you very much.

We're gonna go ahead and move on to the appeal procedure.

Most decisions rendered by the parcel map review committee are appealable.

If you disagree with the decision of the parcel map review committee and you want to appeal its action, call the planning staff immediately at 775-328-6100.

You will be informed of the appeal procedure and application fee.

Appeals must be in writing and must be delivered to the planning and building division within 10 calendar days from the date that the decision being appealed is signed by the secretary of the parcel map review committee and mayor through the original applicant from the proceeding being appealed in accordance with Washoe County code.

So moving on to agenda item number four, public comment.

It's a non-action item.

Uh do we have any public comment waiting for us today, Audriana?

Apologize.

There are no hands raised for public comment.

Okay, thank you.

We'll move on to number five, approval of the March 12th, 2026 agenda.

That's our agenda today.

I haven't heard any uh need to change this agenda, so I'll just uh call for a motion.

This is Rob.

I move to approve is written.

Second Wes I'll second.

Thank you.

Motion and a second to approve all in favor, aye.

Aye, aye.

All opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

We'll move on to the approval of the January 8th, 2026 draft minutes.

Does anyone have uh any comments on the draft minutes?

Any uh requested changes or questions.

Hearing none, I'll call for a motion.

This is West.

Uh I move to approve the minutes from the previous meeting.

Wait, handrack second.

Thank you.

We have a motion and a second.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

We approve the generate amendments uh unanimously.

We're going to move on to the meet of today's meeting, the project review items.

Number seven A.

Tentative parcel map case number WTPM23.

And today we have uh Julie O'Lander from planning staff to tell us about this.

What can you tell us about this, Billy?

Um Adriana, you're gonna put my little screen up, my PowerPoint.

Adriana.

Sorry, I keep not taking off my mute.

Yes, go okay.

Let me know when you can see it and if it looks okay.

Okay, does it look fine?

I don't see it.

Oh, there it is.

All right.

Okay, so this is to approve a detentative parcel map to divide uh 2.43 acre parcel into four parcels of one of 30,000 and 69 square feet, 30,771 square feet, 21,672 square feet, and 23,343 for 45 square feet.

Do you have to forward it for me?

Oh, yeah.

And then here's um uh uh vicinity map on the on the left.

You can see how it's out sort of in the northern portion of Washoe County.

Um that's Geiger Grade to the on the top of the screen to the right, and then Mount Rose.

And so you can see it's in that um triangle area between Geiger and um old 395.

And then on the on the right-hand side is a closer um um view of the of the map of the location.

So the zoning on the property is medium density suburban, the maximum um potential maximum lots on the parcel are four, and they're proposing four lots.

The minimum lot size for MDS is 1200 12,000 square feet, and the minimum lot size on this parcel map is 21,672 um square feet, and that's for parcel three.

And here's um a view of the of the proposed um layout.

You can see that there's four parcels um coming off uh cul-de-sac.

And just to let you all know, there wasn't a oh I'll I'll go on to that next screen.

So you see the where the four parcels are laid out.

So just a little background on this.

Um as you might have noticed, this is from 2023.

So a parcel map application was originally submitted in 2023, but the applicants asked to delay the process um until there were um two 33 foot wide easements they wanted to have abandoned, and also there was a change of um surveyors, and then um just on this previous few weeks last week on March 3rd of this of 2026, the event application was heard and approved by the planning commission.

And the approved abandon was for two 33 foot access easements along the north and east portion of the parcel, and then only a 13-foot parcel portion of the parcel, a 33-foot easement along the western um parcel line.

Maybe I'll go back up to that.

Let me go back up to that screen.

Maybe that will show it a little bit better.

Can are you forwarding it or I'm forwarding it, Adriana?

Um forwarding it, Julie.

Can you go back up to that?

Just um so if you can see, and I I apologize, I should have highlighted it a little bit better, but you can sort of see the easements, the dotted dashed line, and um on the on the north and then the on the east, and on the west, it says 13.

Right.

Go back up a little bit, you know.

Your arrow go up a little farther, a little farther, and on go to your right, it says 13 there.

That's where the 13 um foot um portion that's going to be abandoned.

So we're preserving 20 feet along of an easement along there.

And now you can go down to the next screen past the the background screen.

Um, and just to give you a little background on this parcel, there is a single family house and a detached accessory structure on the parcel four.

And the as I said, the property is MDS, and the single family dwelling and garage does meet those setbacks.

Next screen.

So here's a little bit of a layout of the parcels.

You can see where it's located.

And so the parcel to the north is owned by BLM, and we don't really know how that parcel is supposed to be accessed.

The other surrounding parcels do have access.

And so the abandonments on those two abandonments on the north and the east were approved by planning commission because of that.

But you can sort of see the lay of the land around the parcel.

Next screen.

The subject parcel is located in the Southeast Trucking Meadows plan area, and it does have specific requirements.

I'm not going to read through them all, but there's a dense requirement and then a minimum lot size.

It does meet the meet both of those items.

If you I can go through those a little more in depth if you need me to.

Next slide.

Oops, excuse me.

This is a wrong this slide.

Should have been deleted at my air.

Next slide.

So various agencies review the application and their comments are included in the staff report.

Agencies with condition are included in the conditions of approval.

The condition from water rights has been amended to remove the reference to Tamois and change to water purveyor.

The applicant let us know that the Steamboat Springs Waterworks Authority and not Tamar provided water in this area.

Staff is able to make the required findings as shown in the staff report and recommends approval.

And next slide has a possible motion.

Also for available for questions.

Thank you, Julie.

Does that have anything to add to Julie's presentation?

I'll go ahead and unmute Sierra Dierksen.

I apologize if I said that wrong.

If you would like to address the committee, now is your chance.

Or if any of the representatives would like to speak, go ahead and use a raise hand feature.

Okay.

I'm not getting any feedback from the applicant or representatives, Eric.

Okay, thank you very much.

How about the um committee?

Anybody on the parcel map committee have anything they'd like to talk about on this one?

It is an interesting, you know, it's one of those things where we're kind of creating an interesting little couple parcels where I don't think it's gonna be a problem.

I I don't see a problem with it, but it is one of those fun little Washoe County things where it's not just gonna be a normal cold sack, it's gonna have that interesting little uh different access for the southeast parcel.

But nobody seems to have any issues with it.

Everybody seems okay.

Wayne, Wayne, that's here from Wayne.

Uh, this is Wayne Handrack.

Um I noticed that on the map displayed here, it shows the access ease bit easement being abandoned per the parcel map.

You can't abandon access easements on a parcel map.

Has to go through the abandonment process to get rid of access easements.

You can get rid of utility easements with the notarized utility certificate, but not access.

Well, um, does that access um need to be abandoned or was that already abandoned?

Is that one of the accesses that was already abandoned and they're just saying that?

No, it's the cul de sac, Eric.

It is the cul de sac.

Yeah.

I had to have conversations.

This is Julie Um Olander planning.

I did have um convers an email exchange with um the applicant and the applicant's representative explained that that that could not be abandoned, that if they wanted to abandon it, anything else besides the three abandonments or the three easements that went to planning commission last week, they would have to come in for a new abandonment.

So um, I know it's on the map, but I think I would um suggest that we um just all the all that they can do in this in uh um in this application is um create the parcels.

Does are does it create any issues to create the parcels before the that easement is abandoned the way they're suggesting?

Will they be required to come back and get that?

I don't think so.

They that's up that's up to the applicant.

And Eric, I do not required to make this work, is what I'm asking.

In order for this parcel map to function properly, does that abandonment need to occur?

Not as far as I'm concerned.

And require Secretary Adriana Eric, I do see the applicant representative has their hand raised, so I'm gonna go ahead and allow them to speak.

Okay.

Uh John Gomez, if you'll please unmute and state your first and last name for the record.

Hello, this is John Gomez, land surveyor here, uh for the map.

Um in regards to uh Wayne's comment about the access easement.

I don't see where this is being um an access easement being granted to Washoe County anywhere.

Um Wayne, maybe you can help me out with that.

There, there's some previous parcel maps when it was originally some of these lots are originally created.

Um, it was an open offer for dedication and uh reservation of utility easements.

Um and I don't and I don't see where it's ever noted as an access easement to Washoe County.

Open open offers of dedication are treated as access easements until they're accepted or abandoned.

Gotcha.

Okay, so that was uh that's an easy misunderstanding, I suppose, John.

Do you can you comment on the functionality of these parcels without that?

So there um everything works the same.

Um the only reason we were trying to abandon was just to try to create some more room for setbacks.

Um, but but that may be something that we can do when you know we the applicant gets further along the line and is is planning out building building putting buildings on the parcels, um, but it doesn't need to be done to get any of these parcels to function.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um Wes, I think you have your hand raised as well.

Yeah, I have a I actually have a quick kind of procedural question, and probably Mr.

Gomez will have to jump in to answer um the question is since Timber had reviewed this based off of being Tumwa and not the Steamboat Springs water system.

Does the Steamboat Springs water system actually have the capacity and the ability to serve uh new parcels that are going up into this area?

Like, do we do they actually have the water rights available and the capacity and ability to serve these parcels?

Uh I believe the applicant has gone through that process and has a will serve letter already.

And and Sierra, you can confirm that for me.

Sierra, if you'll please unmute and state your first and last name for the record.

Hi, Sierra Dirksen here, applicants.

Um, I just want to confirm what John said.

I have worked with Steamboat Springs Water Authority, and they've provided a letter of intent and a discovery report that we have paid for, and they've confirmed their ability to provide water to the new parcels.

Perfect.

Thank you.

I just wanted to cover our bases, didn't want you to get too far down.

Um Julie, do you know if Timber reviewed this subsequent to the steamboatings?

Yeah, Timber wrote me a new condition.

That's the reason that condition has been amended.

So he gave me a new condition after um Sierra um provided that information about Steamboat, and um he confirmed that, and then he provided a new condition from water, and that's why the amend the conditions are amended now.

Okay, thank you, Julie.

And I believe that uh um Jen had her hand up as well.

Uh Jenny Williamson for the record.

Um I'm with uh Chuckamato's fire.

Uh so unfortunately I was not here.

I wasn't in this position when this uh originally came through, and and my office had reviewed it.

So I'm a little bit behind the ball, but I have looked at this.

So I just want to confirm with the the cul-de-sact.

So we do have access to these five parcels, correct?

Yes, this Julia Land.

Do you have there's a there's a road that comes to the to the map, um, to the there's a cul-de-sac there, and all four parcels will have access.

I don't know if it'd help you and put that um PowerPoint back up if you want to look at that again.

I Adriana might be able to put that back up for us.

That's okay.

I have it up on my screen.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay, I just want to make sure, and because I don't know what the comments were from my office, uh, from my department.

Um if there was any significant comments or anything like that um that were made.

Yep.

Fire had no conditions, they only had comments.

Yeah, I just said that it was okay to be approved.

So I but I don't know if there's a way it if the applicant knows of you know the water flow requirements and the access road requirements and things like that.

Those are um they're in they're included in the staff report um under the agency comments.

Right.

And it doesn't say anything under for the for the fire district.

It just says that it's basically approved for or it's okay to be approved.

So they didn't give any specifics.

Exhibit um B is agency comments.

It should be on double check, but it should they should be listed in there.

Yeah, their agency applicant was reviewed by Trekkie Meadows Fire Protection District, and no uh recommendation for denial was received.

If I'm reading that correctly, page 19 exhibit B, they have fire app apparatus and access roads listed conditions.

Thanks, Wayne.

Yep.

Oh, there you are.

Thank you very much.

I'll look at those really quick.

This um Jenny, this can be hard to figure out where the you know we've got like you know uh attachments and uh uh appendices and go and look here for where it is.

And so um I apologize that it's like that sometimes, but um thank you for bringing that up since we didn't see it.

Um I hope it's just a matter of of uh trunky formatting and that you'll become comfortable with it as we move on.

This is Wayne Handrack.

I just wanted to mention that uh just based on previous history, the odds of this the cul de sac being abandoned um would be pretty low um because that'd be required for fire turnaround and access.

Um so the odds of it being abandoned are normally they want cul de sacs at the end of what's essentially a dead end.

Thank you, Wayne.

That's what I was just gonna bring up is that um that cul de sac is almost almost certainly not just to make it nice for the residents.

That code stack is probably there for fire.

Um and so um changing the size and and scope of that cul de sack will have to any changes to it will have to meet fire's um standards for that and Eric, we do have a hand raised um by John Gomez, the representative.

Interesting.

Go ahead, John.

Go ahead and state your first and last name, please.

John Gomez um again here.

Um so uh so the the problem with the call de sac as it is now being an access easement, the setback I believe is 20 feet from there, which really shrinks up any kind of buildable area area down.

So uh I guess my question would be if that was a emergency turnaround easements, would that change the setback?

No, no.

Any further hands raised, any further questions or input?

Yeah, this is Rob.

I just got one question.

Julie, I just want to um can you just reiterate that there is access to the BOM property behind them from somewhere that this isn't going to create an access issue for the property behind this parcel or these parcels?

Um Julio Lander for the record, yeah.

Um Rob, that um there's 20 a 20-foot easement that's still being maintained along the western um portion of this parcel that was um approved by um planning commission last week, where we it was 30, it's 33 feet wide, and we gave them the they um we're abandoning the county's abandoning only 13 feet of that.

So 20 feet is being preserved for access to that BLM property to the north.

Okay, yeah, I I knew that there was a little change with the 13 feet.

Okay, I just needed a clarification.

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone.

Um so the amended condition is already part of the provided motion.

Um Wayne, um do you believe you could fashion a motion that would include some language that suggests that that um uh offer for dedication is not gonna be abandoned as part of our approval today?

Uh let me find my motion and this is Julia O'Lander for the rec, I mean question.

I mean, question.

I um do I mean it's on the map.

Do we need I mean, but they aren't asking for that in the application.

And um, so is that making it?

It's on the map.

We can't show okay.

I I got it.

Thank you.

Um Julie, do you know where the uh the motion is on um well um motion is in the staff report on me to look real quick.

I got it.

Oh, you got it.

This is Wayne Handrack.

I move that after giving reason consideration.

I'm so sorry to um interrupt you.

Um Eric, we didn't call for public comment.

No, yeah, you're right.

We didn't.

Thank you.

Um let's make sure nobody on the on the committee, everybody satisfied on the committee.

Do we have any public comment?

There are no hands raised for public comment.

Thank you.

Thank you for asking.

Okay, Wayne.

Um, if you're willing to give it a shot, we're listening.

This is Wayne Handrak.

Pardon me.

I move that after giving giving reason consideration of the information contained within the staff report and the information received during the public meeting that Washoe County Parcel Map Review Committee approved parcel map case number WTPM 23 001 for Sierra Dick Deekerson at L subject to the conditions of approval included as exhibit A with the staff report and the exception of the abandonment of the cul de sac as shown on the map.

Um, and make the determination that the following criteria is or will be adequately provided for pursuant to Washoe County Code section 110606.30e, and that's number one sub items one through 12.

Thank you, Wayne.

Well done.

Is anybody um willing to second that?

This is West Review of health I'll second.

Thank you, Liz.

We have a motion and a second for approval with uh slight change to the proposed abandonment.

Do we have uh uh all of I'll call for the vote?

All in favor, aye.

Aye, aye, all opposed.

So this item passes unanimously.

Thank you for the good discussion and the time to make sure we got this done properly.

I'm sure everybody's gonna appreciate that.

Let's move on back to the agenda for item number eight, reports and future agenda items.

Um we'll see if we have any partial maps coming up.

Um as far as legal information and updates.

Uh Chaz, do you have anything for us today on that?

Uh deputy attorney uh deputy district attorney Chaz Lennon for the record, no updates today.

Thank you.

Um I'll mention again, I'm not sure if it is um just considered best practice for the deputy DA to read the uh uh the the part in the in the front about um the zoom connection and the um uh potential conflicts of interest.

Um if that's just by tradition the best way to do it, that's fine.

Um, but if um you would like to have that maybe rotate it around or have somebody no objection by me, I'm fine doing it.

I just wanted to make sure um um you know fortunately we we don't need to call you much during the meeting, but we do appreciate you being here and taking care of at least that item for it, and we know you're there if we need it, if we need you one more um round of potential public comment, Adriana number nine.

Uh coin secretary Adriana, there are no hands raised for public comment.

Well, it looks like we've worked our way through um today's meeting.

We're at number 10 adjournment.

I'll call the meeting adjourned at 2 34.

And thank you, everybody.

Thank you.