On the agenda: meeting — data center (Sep 17)

Storey County Planning Commission
Meeting Agenda
Thursday September 17, 2026 at 6:00 p.m.

Storey County Courthouse, District Courtroom*
26 South B Street, Virginia City, NV
Alexia Sober – Chairperson
Rachel Holderread – Planning Commissioner
Jim Umbach – Planning Commissioner

Carlos Negrete- Vice Chairperson
Kristen Brown – Planning Commissioner
Denise Victorine – Planning Commissioner
Lee Sterrett – Planning Commissioner

This meeting will be held in person and the public is welcome to attend.
Members of the public who wish to watch the meeting remotely may do so by accessing the Storey
County Clerk’s new YouTube channel. To access the Channel and the Live Stream:
1. Open your browser and go to www.youtube.com/@storeycountyclerk
2. Click on the Storey County seal
when it has the LIVE display,
or click on the video picture for the meeting in the playlist under the county seal
with the LIVE display on the graphic.
- Public comment may be made by in-person appearance only. For additional information or supporting documents please contact the
Storey County Planning Department at 775-847-1144.
All items include discussion and possible action to approve, modify, deny, or continue unless marked
otherwise.

1.

Call to Order at 6:00 p.m.

2.

Roll Call

3.

Pledge of Allegiance

4.

Public Comment (No Action): Public comment is welcomed at the beginning and end of each meeting. These
comments should be limited to matters not already on today’s calendar agenda. Public comment is again
welcomed after each item on the agenda, & those comments should be limited to the agendized topic. Public
comment is limited to 3 minutes per individual.

5.

Discussion/For Possible Action: Approval of Agenda for September 17, 2026.

6.

Discussion/For Possible Action: Approval of Minutes for June 18, 2026.

7.

Discussion/For Possible Action: Approval of Minutes for July 16, 2026.

8.

Discussion Only/For Possible Action: Direction from the Planning Commission on the DRAFT Design Guidelines and
Standards. DOWL and Storey County Staff will provide a presentation of the DRAFT. The purpose of the update is

1

to simplify the Design Criteria and Improvement Standards and reduce their scope to focus on specific types of
development and topics, as well as to make them more outcome based and more flexible overall.

9.

Discussion/For Possible Action: Determination of next Planning Commission meeting.

10. Correspondence (no action):
11. Public Comment (no action)
12. Staff (no action)
13. Board Comments (no action)
14. Adjournment (no action)
Notes:
•
Supporting material is available to the public and may be obtained at https://www.storeycounty.org/agendacenter or the
Storey County Courthouse, Planning Department, 26 South B Street, Virginia City, Nevada.
•
There may be a quorum of Storey County Commissioners in attendance, but no action or discussion will be taken by the
Commissioners.
•
Public comment will be allowed after each item on the agenda (this comment should be limited to the item on the agenda).
Public comment will also be allowed at the end of each meeting (this comment should be limited to matters not on the
agenda). Public Comment is limited to 3 minutes per individual.
•
Items on the agenda may be taken out of order, the public body may combine two or more agenda items for consideration,
and the public body may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any time.
•
Additional information pertaining to any item on this agenda may be requested from Lyndi Renaud, Planning Department (775847-1144).
•
Supporting material is available to the public and may be obtained at https://www.storeycounty.org/agendacenter or the
Storey County Courthouse, Planning Department, 26 South B Street, Virginia City, Nevada.
Certification of Posting
I, Lyndi Renaud on behalf of the Storey County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that I posted, or caused to be posted, a copy of
this Agenda at the following location on or before September 8, 2026: Storey County Courthouse and Storey County website at
https://www.storeycounty.org/agendacenter. And the Nevada State website at https://notice.nv.gov/. Courtesy copies of the agenda
may be posted at the Storey County Community Development; Virginia City Fire Station 71; Mark Twain Community Center; Lockwood
Community/Senior Center; Canyon GID; Lockwood Fire Station; Virginia City Highlands Fire Station; Virginia City Highlands Online
Message Board.
By Lyndi Renaud, Secretary of the Planning Commission

2

STOREY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
Thursday June 18, 2026, at 6:00 p.m.
Storey County Courthouse
26 S B Street, Virginia City, Nevada
MEETING MINUTES
CHAIRPERSON: Alexia Sober

VICE-CHAIRPERSON: Carlos Negrete

COMMISSIONERS:
Denise Victorine, Jim Umbach, Alexia Sober, Lee Sterrett, Rachel Holderread
1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 6:00 P.M.
2. Roll Call: Kristen Brown, Denise Victorine, Jim Umbach, Carlos Negrete, Alexia Sober, Lee Sterrett, Rachel

Holderread.

Also Present: Planner Jessica Prager, Planning Director Kathy Canfield, and Chief Deputy District Attorney Brian
Brown.
3. Pledge of Allegiance: The Chairperson led the Pledge of Allegiance
4. Discussion/For Possible Action: Election of Chairperson of the Planning Commission for 2026.

Motion: I, Jim Umbach motion to nominate Alexia Sober as Chairperson of the Planning Commission for 2026,
Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Umbach, Seconded by Commissioner Sterrett, Vote: Motion carried by
vote (summary: Aye=7).
No Public Comment.
5. Discussion/For Possible Action: Election of Vice-Chairperson of the Planning Commission for 2026.

Motion: I, Lee Sterrett motion to nominate Carlos Negrete as Vice Chairperson of the Planning Commission for
2026, Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Sterrett, Seconded by Commissioner Umbach, Vote: Motion
carried by vote (summary: Aye=7).
No Public Comment.
6. Public Comment (No Action): Public comment is welcomed at the beginning and end of each meeting. These

comments should be limited to matters not already on today’s calendar agenda. Public comment is again welcomed
after each item on the agenda, & those comments should be limited to the agendized topic. Public comment is
limited to 3 minutes per individual.
No Public Comment.

1

7. Discussion/For Possible Action: Approval of Agenda for June 18, 2026.

No Public Comment
Motion: Approval of Agenda for June 18, 2026, Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Umbach, Seconded by
Commissioner Brown, Vote: Motion carried by vote (summary: Aye=7).
No Public Comment.
8. Discussion/For Possible Action: Approval of Minutes for February 5, 2026.

Motion: Approval of Minutes for February 5, 2026, Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Umbach, Seconded
by Commissioner Brown, Vote: Motion carried by vote (summary: Aye=7).
No Public Comment.
9.

Discussion Only/For Possible Action: Special Use Permit (File 2017-020-A2-2026) The applicant, Asia Union
Electronic Chemicals – Reno, Inc. (AUECC), requests an amendment to Special Use Permit (SUP) Number 2017-020-A12020 to modify the original Chemical Product List by adding N-Methylpyrrolidone (nMP) which was not included
in the original Chemical Product List or the amended SUP. The subject property is located at 1400 Waltham
Way, APN 004-093-36, McCarran, Storey County, Nevada.
Planner Jessica Prager summarized the request. A Special Use Permit was issued for this project in 2017, and an
amended Special Use Permit was issued in 2020. This request is to add a chemical to the Chemical Production List
associated with SUP 2017-020-A1-2020.
If approved, the Chemical Production List would be modified to include nMP, and all other conditions of approval
would remain in effect. The Special Use Permit only authorizes the uses described in the original SUP. The
applicant is requesting to modify their previously approved Chemical Product List by adding an additional chemical
associated with their Special Use Permit. The applicant now has a business opportunity to process, package and
sell another solvent used in the semi-conductor industry to supply to customers. They are requesting to add NMethylpyrrolidone (nMP) to their chemical list. N-Methylpyrrolidone (nMP) is a widely used solvent in various
semi-conductor applications. This material was not included in the original Chemical Product List.
This application only addresses modifying the Chemical Product List. No other portion of the Special Use Permit is
being addressed at this time. If the modification to add an additional chemical to the Chemical Product List is not
approved, the original conditions of approval remain in effect.
In no way is the proposed modification of the Chemical Production List expected to diminish the safety needs or
protocols. The additional chemical allows for the applicant to expand their services.
The applicant corresponded with the Storey County Fire Marshall. After review by Storey County Fire, there are no
objections to the applicant’s proposal of amending their SUP by adding nMP to the Chemical Production List, or use
of the chemical at the project location.
Jared Kerney, Plant Manager for AUECC, and Planning Staff, answered questions from the Commission related to
the reason for adding the chemical, safety, storage, spill containment, security and transportation of the additional
chemical. See details in the following paragraphs.
Mr. Kerney stated that AUECC has been presented with a business opportunity to process, package and sell another
solvent used in the semi-conductor industry to supply to customers. N-Methylpyrrolidone is not regulated by NDEP’s
Chemical Accident Prevention Program (CAPP) program. It is similar to other chemical listed solvents that are already

2

approved in the existing special use permit. This chemical is not regulated by CAPP due to the NFPA flammability
rating being below 4.
NDEP’s Chemical Accident Prevention Program (CAPP) stated that “N-Methylpyrrolidone (nMP) is not on the CAPP
Table of Highly Hazardous Substances. Since it is not in the table, interconnected to the ammonia process, or could
result in the release of the covered process, it is outside CAPP regulations. At this time, the NDEP-CAPP has no
concerns with nMP at this facility in relation to the other listed chemicals at this location.” CAPP audits the facility
annually.
AUECC stores and processes the flammable materials in dedicated areas that are designed for the family of chemicals
that nMP belongs to (flammables) as part of their facility engineering design and risk reduction. This chemical will be
in a detached building. All chemicals previously approved for the applicant have some nuance on storage and
processing requirements or best-known practices such as chemical compatibility, temperature control to prevent
freezing or off gassing for example.
The average quantity of nMP that will be stored on-site will be approximately 40,000 lbs. The maximum quantity that
could be stored is approximately 120,000 lbs. depending on shipping and receiving schedules and timelines.
The proposed new chemical, nMP, will be stored in HDPE plastic drums and totes and portable tanks/tank wagons.
They then process the chemical to purify it (e.g. filtration or ion exchange, etc.) and then repackage the product in
plastic or glass bottles, HDPE drums or totes. All solvents at this location are stored and processed in the two
detached buildings south of the main building. The process and storage areas are designed for flammable materials.
Using these detached buildings for storage and processing is part of their facility engineering/safety design. The tank
wagons or portable tanks will be stored next to these detached buildings, or in other trailer parking areas on the
south side of the facility. The product will be delivered to the facility in tank wagons and there is a possibility the
applicant may ship out a tank wagon or portable tank to their customers.
No Public Comment.
Motion: In accordance with the recommendation by staff, the Findings of Fact under Section 6.A of this
report, and other findings deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission, and in compliance with the
conditions of approval, I Lee Sterrett, recommend approval of Special Use Permit Amendment 2017-020-A22026 by applicant Asia Union Electronic Chemicals – Reno, Inc. (AUECC). The applicant requests an amendment to
Special Use Permit (SUP) Number 2017-020-A1-2020 to modify the original Chemical Product List by adding NMethylpyrrolidone (nMP) which was not included in the original Chemical Product List or the amended SUP.
The subject property is located at 1400 Waltham Way, APN 004-093-36, McCarran, Storey County, Nevada.,
Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Sterrett, Seconded by Commissioner Umbach,
Planner Jessica Prager read the findings of fact into the record.
(1)

This approval is for Special Use Permit Amendment 2017-020-A2-2026 by applicant Asia
Union Electronic Chemicals – Reno, Inc. (AUECC). The applicant requests an amendment to
Special Use Permit (SUP) Number 2017-020-A1-2020 to modify the original Chemical
Product List by adding N-Methylpyrrolidone (nMP) which was not included in the
original Chemical Product List or the amended SUP. The subject property is located at
1400 Waltham Way, APN 004-093-36, McCarran, Storey County, Nevada.

(2)

The Amended Special Use Permit 2017-020-A2-2026 conforms to the 2024 Storey County
Master Plan for the McCarran planning area in which the subject property is located.

3

(3)

Granting of the Amended Special Use Permit 2017-020-A2-2026 amending the Special Use
Permit to modify the original Chemical Production List will not under the circumstances of the
particular case adversely affect to a material degree the health or safety of persons/property in
the neighborhood of the subject property and will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or materially injurious to property improvements in the neighborhood or area of the
subject property.

(5)

The Amended Special Use Permit 2017-020-A2-2026 amending Special Use Permit to modify the
original Chemical Production List will not impose substantial adverse impacts or safety hazards
on the abutting properties or the surrounding area, and it will comply with all federal, state and
county regulations.

(6)

The conditions under the Amended Special Use Permit 2017-020-A2-2026 amending Special Use
Permit to modify the original Chemical Production List does not conflict with the minimum
requirements in the Storey County Zoning Ordinance.

Vote: Motion carried by vote (summary: Aye=7).
No Public Comment
10. Discussion/For Possible Action: Determination of next planning commission meeting.

Motion: Next planning commission meeting to be tentatively held on July 16, 2026, at 6:00 P.M. at the Storey
County Courthouse, District Courtroom, Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Brown, Seconded by
Commissioner Sterrett, Vote: Motion carried by vote (summary: Aye=7).
No Public Comment
11. Correspondence (No Action) – Letter to Planning Commissioners from Patty Dewey, included in packet.
12. Public Comment (No Action) – None
13. Staff Report (No Action) – Planning Director Canfield mentioned current ongoing projects:

- Accessory Dwelling Unit town hall and survey: Storey County invited R-1 residents to a community meeting at
the end of May to discuss accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and secondary residences located within the single-family R-1
zoning district of Virginia City and Gold Hill. Storey County is exploring opportunities to create additional housing within
the boundaries of the Storey County Water District. Allowing for a secondary residence and/or an accessory dwelling
unit may address the topic of additional housing. A survey was also sent to R-1 property owners regarding their opinion
on this topic. The results will be presented to the Board for review. No changes are proposed at this time.
- Design Standards update is almost complete and will be presented to the Planning Commission.
- Zoning Code update is ongoing.
- Gold Canyon Area Drainage Master Plan is complete and was presented to the public at a recent Storey County
Commissioner’s meeting. The final report is available on the Planning website.
During Staff comment Commissioner Brown asked if the letter of correspondence received could be placed on a future
agenda to discuss the topic. Planning Director Canfield said that yes, there is potential for that and said to reach out to
Staff if desired.
14. Board Comments (No Action) – None
15. Adjournment (No Action) - The meeting was adjourned at 6:41 p.m.

4

To obtain a recording of the meeting please email [email protected] or call the office at 775.847.1144
Respectfully Submitted, By Lyndi Renaud

5

STOREY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
Thursday July 16, 2026, at 6:00 p.m.
Storey County Courthouse
26 S B Street, Virginia City, Nevada
MEETING MINUTES
CHAIRPERSON: Alexia Sober

VICE-CHAIRPERSON: Carlos Negrete

COMMISSIONERS:
Denise Victorine, Jim Umbach, Alexia Sober, Lee Sterrett, Rachel Holderread
1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by the Vice Chairperson at 6:00 P.M.
2. Roll Call: Carlos Negrete, Kristen Brown, Denise Victorine, Jim Umbach, Lee Sterrett, Rachel Holderread.

Absent: Alexia Sober

Also Present: Planning Director Kathy Canfield, Planner Jessica Prager, County Manager Austin Osborne, and Chief
Deputy District Attorney Brian Brown.
3. Pledge of Allegiance: The Chairperson led the Pledge of Allegiance
4. Public Comment (No Action): Public comment is welcomed at the beginning and end of each meeting. These

comments should be limited to matters not already on today’s calendar agenda. Public comment is again
welcomed after each item on the agenda, & those comments should be limited to the agendized topic. Public
comment is limited to 3 minutes per individual.
No Public Comment.

5.

Discussion/For Possible Action: Approval of Agenda for July 16, 2026.
No Public Comment
Motion: Approval of Agenda for June 18, 2026, Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Umbach, Seconded by
Commissioner Sterrett, Vote: Motion carried by unanimous vote (summary: Aye=6).
No Public Comment.

6. Discussion/For Possible Action: Special Use Permit 2026-033 is a request by the applicant to add an additional 12

feet of height to an existing communication tower. The subject property is located at 662 Italy Drive, McCarran,
Storey County, Nevada, APN 005-091-26.

1

Planner Jessica Prager summarized the request. The applicant is requesting an extension to the existing T-Mobile
monopole antenna by adding an additional 12 feet in height and install 6 antennas and 6 radios. With this extension
request, there will need to be 2 cabinets, utility panels, H-frame and conduits on a new 10ft by 15ft concrete slab
within the existing facility enclosures, and a new ice bridge from the ground equipment area to the monopole to
convey the conduits/cables.
The original tower was erected approximately in October 2019, at a height of 75 ft which conforms to the allowed
height in the I-2 Heavy Industrial Zone. All the equipment addition is allowed under I-2 Heavy Industrial zoning. This
Special Use Permit is addressing the additional height requested for the tower to be approximately 90 ft.
The proposed additional height will be associated with commercial communication tower use that is an allowed use
for the existing zoning and consistent with the Master Plan identification for industrial land uses within the Tahoe
Reno Industrial Center. As conditioned, the proposed height will be consistent with all Storey County Code
requirements, which will be demonstrated at the time of construction permit review and approval.
No Public Comment.
Motion: In accordance with the recommendation by staff, the Findings of Fact under Section 3.A of this report as
read into the record by staff, and other findings deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission, and in
compliance with the conditions of approval, I Lee Sterrett, recommend approval of Special Use Permit 2026-033, a
request to add an additional 12 feet of height to an existing communication tower. The subject property is located
at 662 Italy Drive, McCarran, Nevada, APN 005-091-26., Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Sterrett,
Seconded by Commissioner Victorine,
Planner Jessica Prager read the findings into the record.
(1)

This approval is for Special Use Permit 2026-033, a request to add an additional 12 feet of height
to an existing communication tower. The subject property is located at 662 Italy Drive,
McCarran, Nevada, APN 005-091-26.

(2)

The Special Use Permit conforms to the 2024 Storey County Master Plan for the McCarran
designated area in which the subject property is located. A discussion supporting this finding for
the Special Use Permit is provided in Section 2.D of this staff report and the contents thereof are
cited in an approval of this Special Use Permit. The Special Use Permit complies with the
general purpose, goals, objectives, and standards of the county master plan, the zoning
ordinance and any other plan, program, map or ordinance adopted, or under consideration
pursuant to the official notice by the county.

(3)

The proposal location, size, height, operations, and other significant features will be compatible
with and will not cause substantial negative impact on adjacent land uses, or will perform a
function or provide a service that is essential to the surrounding land uses, community, and
neighborhood.

(4)

The Special Use Permit will result in no substantial or undue adverse effect on adjacent
property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, public improvements,
public sites or right-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health, safety, and general
welfare, either as they now exist or as they may in the future be developed as a result of the
implementation of the provisions and policies of the county master plan, this title, and any other
plans, program, map or ordinance adopted or under consideration pursuant to an official notice,
by the county, or other governmental agency having jurisdiction to guide growth and
development.

2

(5)

The proposed use in the proposed area will be adequately served by and will impose no undue
burden on any of the improvements, facilities, utilities, or services provided by the county or
other governmental agency having jurisdiction in the county.

(6)

The Special Use Permit, with the recommended conditions of approval, complies with the
requirements of the 1999 Storey County Zoning Code, Chapters 17.62 – Special Uses, and 17.37
– Heavy Industrial Zone.

Vote: Motion carried by unanimous vote (summary: Aye=6).
No Public Comment.
7. Discussion Only/For Possible Action: Special Use Permit 2026-029. The applicant requests a Special Use Permit to

construct three (3) 345 kV transmission corridors within Storey County. The transmission corridors, Mira Loma,
Comstock Meadows #1 and Comstock Meadows #2 will be located within easements across land zoned Industrial
and Forestry with some easement encroachment on Estates zoned land. This Special Use Permit addresses the
proposed transmission corridors located outside of the Official Master Plan Map of Storey County Transmission
Corridor and the additional height proposed for support towers beyond that permitted by the applicable zoning
district.
Planning Director Kathy Canfield briefly summarized the request then introduced Charles Hutchinson
representing NV Energy to give a presentation on the project. Power Point presentation is attached at the
end of the Minutes.
Project and Background. NV Energy is proposing to construct three new 345 kV power lines within Storey
County.
•

Mira Loma: The Mira Loma line enters Storey County on APN 004-291-16 and extends north to
APN 004-201-12. The corridor then turns northwest and then west remaining on APN 004-20112. The corridor continues west onto APN 004-201-05 and then follows the boundary between
the Virginia Ranches (40 acres) subdivision and the Sunny Hills Ranchos subdivision. The line
then crosses into Washoe County with a small portion to the northwest re-entering Storey
County then continuing on to the Mira Loma substation in Washoe County.

•

Comstock Meadows #1: This corridor starts at the Storey/Lyon County line on APN 004-201-12.
The corridor runs parallel to the Mira Loma line for a distance but keeps north where the Mira
Loma line veers to the northwest. The corridor then goes to the east and northeast ending on
Battery Boulevard at the existing Comstock Meadows substation.

•

Comstock Meadows #2. This corridor follows the USA Parkway alignment then veers west then
north to reach the Comstock Meadows substation on Battery Boulevard.

The three projects will include constructing, operating and maintaining 345kV transmission system. The
project will be to install transmission lines, distribution lines, support towers, optical amplifier facility for
system communications, access roads and pulling and tensioning sites for wire-string activities during
construction. When completed, the transmission corridor will connect Southern and Northern Nevada.
This project is a part of NV Energy Greenlink Nevada Transmission project. The overall Greenlink project
is designed to connect electrical transmission throughout the State of Nevada and beyond. The Bureau
of Land Management, in cooperation with NV Energy, developed an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)

3

that analyzed the impacts of the proposed project primarily on public lands. Although Storey County
land is identified in the EIS, there is little analysis as there is minimal public land within Storey County
that the transmission corridor would impact. The EIS received its Record of Decision in September 2024.
A copy of the EIS can be found on the Bureau of Land Management website, the Storey County website
or with the Storey County Planning Department.
Any transmission facilities located within the mapped corridor are not subject to the Special Use Permit
requirement for the proposed land use. In this case, the majority of the proposed lines are new
alignment and the Special Use Permit is required. Although the map does show a north/south
alignment from near where this proposed project enters Storey County from the south, closer
inspection documents this is further west than the proposed alignment and was a part of a previous
project (Blackhawk) which was not constructed.
While a transmission project within a transmission corridor does not require a special use permit as it
relates to land use, if additional height beyond that permitted by the zoning district is proposed (75-feet
for Industrial, 35-feet for Forestry), a special use permit is needed to address the additional height.
Due to the extensive length of the presentation and the discussion that followed, AI Copilot was utilized for this
section of the Meeting Minutes. For access to a recording of the meeting please contact [email protected].
Charles Hutchinson presented a power point to explain the request for the special use permit. (attached)
Good evening, Commissioners. I’m Charles Hutchinson, Permitting Manager with WSP, serving as NV Energy’s
engineering and environmental consultant for the Greenlink Nevada Transmission Project. Our role is to manage the
local, state, and federal non-NEPA permits required to move this project into construction. Tonight, we’ll provide a clear
overview of the project and walk through the specific elements included in the special use permit submitted to the
Planning Department.
Joining me are NV Energy team members:
• Tiffany Beach, Director of Transmission Development
• Adam Godorov, Project Engineering Director
• Alexandra Drozdoff, Government Relations Manager for Northern Nevada
Our goal is to ensure the public and the Commission have accurate information about why this project is needed, what it
includes, and how it fits into Nevada’s existing electrical infrastructure.
Project Overview
Greenlink Nevada consists of three major transmission components—Greenlink West, Common Side, and Greenlink
North. Together, they form a statewide power loop designed to improve system redundancy, resiliency, and overall
reliability for all NV Energy customers. The project includes new 525 kV and 345 kV transmission lines, substation
infrastructure, and essential telecommunications systems such as fiber-optic amplifier sites and microwave towers that
support real-time system monitoring.
Creating a looped, redundant system enables NV Energy to reroute power during equipment failures, severe weather, or
emergency conditions, reducing outages and supporting critical facilities such as hospitals, police, fire services, and
community centers.

4

Mandate and Need
Under Nevada Senate Bill 448, NV Energy is required to bring this infrastructure online by the end of 2028. The project is
designed to support both current and future load needs across residential, commercial, industrial, and renewable energy
customers. It is not being built for any single industry; all new development—from homes to data centers—must undergo
their own feasibility studies and regulatory reviews before interconnecting.
Timeline and Regulatory Process
The Public Utilities Commission approved the project in 2021, followed by SB448’s passage later that year. Nevada
Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) review for Greenlink West began in 2022 and concluded in 2024 with the BLM’s
Record of Decision. Greenlink North began its NEPA review in 2023, with a final decision expected in October 2026.
The NEPA process included route analysis, environmental review, resource management planning, tribal consultation,
and multiple public comment periods. Thirty-five tribal governments were invited to participate, and the BLM conducted
early outreach workshops, scoping meetings, and draft/final EIS comment periods.
Environmental and Resource Review
The BLM evaluated impacts to public health and safety, wildlife, cultural and tribal resources, paleontology,
socioeconomics, land use, air and water quality, and more. Mitigation measures are detailed in the EIS appendices.
Although most Common Side facilities are on private land, NV Energy must still meet Endangered Species Act and cultural
resource requirements.
Storey County Facilities
Three 345 kV transmission lines included in your special use permit application begin at the Walker River Substation and
extend toward Mira Loma and Comstock Meadows. These lines use existing transmission corridors where possible and
integrate with NV Energy’s current grid.
Access roads will primarily follow existing routes; temporary construction access will be reclaimed after use. The project
does not create new public access to sensitive areas such as petroglyph sites. Visual simulations show that from nearby
communities—including Virginia City Highlands, Mark Twain, and Cartwright Road—the transmission lines are not visible
due to topography.
Typical structures range from 75 to 160 feet tall, depending on terrain and engineering requirements. All structures
undergo FAA review to ensure safe clearance from navigable airspace.
Community Engagement and Local Coordination
We have coordinated extensively with Storey County’s planning department since 2023 and met directly with residents of
the Mark Twain and Virginia City Highlands communities. Visual simulations and route maps were shared to address
public concerns about visibility, land disturbance, and access.
Similar coordination has taken place with Lyon County and the City of Reno, each of which requires landowner affidavits
or easements before permit processing.
State, Federal, and Local Permits
NV Energy is securing all required permits, including:
• Surface disturbance, air quality, stormwater, and waterway permits (NDEP)
• Forestry permits for sensitive plant species
• State lands approvals for crossing the Carson River

5

• Highway encroachment permits
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers approvals
• FAA structure clearance
• UEPA permit from the Public Utilities Commission (issued once all other permits are obtained)
• BLM right-of-way grants and notice to proceed
Construction Schedule
Construction in Storey County is anticipated to begin in fall 2026 and continue through fall 2027. Workforce needs will
vary from 200 to 400 workers depending on sequencing and material availability.
Closing
We are committed to transparency, accuracy, and continuing engagement as this project moves forward. After sharing a
few final resources—including the project website and public contact information—we welcome questions from the
Commission and the community.
Commissioners discussed this item with the applicant and Staff which included a public comment period.
Public Comment
Comment 1: Attorney for Sunny Hills Ranchos (Lucy Crow)
• Represents a landowner with 20 affected parcels (~800 acres).
• Argues the application is incomplete because landowner approval is not provided.
• States the county traditionally requires owner affidavits and should deny the application.
• Claims NV Energy stopped communicating in late 2025 after years of negotiations.
• Says the routes presented were unclear or unacceptable, and NV Energy has not served eminent domain papers.
• Requests denial or continuance and inclusion of a revocation clause if approved.
• Requests more time to submit additional documentation and evidence.
Comment 2: Statement read on behalf of resident (Joe Charmasson)
• Raises concerns about lack of impact reports, insufficient construction detail, and lack of protective buffers for the
Lagomarsino petroglyphs.
• Warns of stormwater and erosion impacts to Lousetown and Long Valley Creeks.
• Notes risks of heavy equipment damaging private property without clearly defined mitigation.
Comment 3: Local resident (Greg Stefancik)
• Lives in the NW 40s; says lines will be visible.
• Concerned his parcels were not included in notices.
• Worried property owners will be disadvantaged if NV Energy receives approval before easement negotiations are
complete.
• Wants disturbed roads restored and more detail on OHV mitigation.
Continued Board Discussion
Commissioner Brown
• Concerned about competing legal interpretations between the county’s legal opinion and the landowner’s legal
objection.

6

• Suggests a possible condition allowing revocation of the SUP if landowner approvals are not obtained, to avoid
creating precedent or undue burden on property owners.
Commissioner Umbach
• Suggests delaying approval until all property owners sign off.
• Raises concern about complexities if property ownership changes over time.
Commissioner Holderread
• Questions how developer impacts should be weighed against statewide public benefits.
• Requests more concrete documentation about the claimed financial impacts to Sunny Hills Ranchos.
• Notes the objection letter lacks specific supporting details.
Additional concerns were made by commissioners in regard to approving the special use permit without all property
owner authorizations, the timeline of the project and the alignment of the transmission lines.
County Staff and Legal Counsel Response
Planning Director Canfield
• Explains Storey County’s usual practice of requiring owner authorization but states the Code does allow conditional
approvals.
• Reads two key proposed conditions: – Separate construction permits required, with county oversight of disturbance,
reclamation, and OHV mitigation.
– No construction permits until property owner authorization (easement or affidavit) is provided.
Deputy District Attorney Brian Brown
• Confirms the Commission may approve with conditions or may deny.
• States county code does not prohibit processing a Special Use Permit without property owner authorization, as long as
construction is prohibited until permits and easements are secured.
• Notes the Commission could add a revocation clause, though practical impact may be limited because construction is
already barred without property owner consent.
• Supports continuing the item if commissioners feel they need more information from NV Energy or landowners.
NV Energy Response Regarding Landowner Negotiations • NV Energy Staff clarifies: – They negotiated multiple route
adjustments (NV Energy claims eight alternatives; the landowner claims four).
– Communication lapses came from the landowner’s side, then later NV Energy had difficulty re-engaging.
– Eminent domain was filed for a right-of-way (not full parcel acquisition) on May 29, 2026.
– Most Storey County parcels already have easements or affidavits; only a few remain.
– Some landowners requested NV Energy use eminent domain to expedite the process.
– Construction cannot start anywhere along the project until property rights are secured for that segment.
Further Concerns Raised • Landowner’s attorney disputes NV Energy’s account of negotiations.
• Argues the developer was not served eminent domain papers.
• Requests continuance due to limited notice.
• Reiterates concerns about lacking clarity in maps and alignments.
Recess • Chairman calls a recess.

7

Post-Recess Review of Conditions • Planning Director Canfield re-summarizes key permit conditions: – No construction
permitted anywhere until landowner authorization is provided for that specific parcel.
– Project will likely be permitted segment-by-segment.

Chairman Negrete clarifies approval would obligate NV Energy to resolve every parcel’s land rights before any physical
work occurs then called for a motion.
Motion: In accordance with the Findings of Fact under Section 3.A of this report as read into the record by staff, and
other findings deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission, and in compliance with the conditions of approval, I
Lee Sterrett, recommend approval of Special Use Permit 2026-029 to construct three (3) 345 kV transmission corridors
within Storey County. The transmission corridors, Mira Loma, Comstock Meadows #1 and Comstock Meadows #2 will be
located within easements across land zoned Industrial and Forestry with some easement encroachment on Estates
zoned land. This Special Use Permit addresses the proposed transmission corridors located outside of the Official
Master Plan Map of Storey County Transmission Corridor and the additional height proposed for support towers beyond
that permitted by the applicable zoning district., Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Sterrett, Seconded by
Commissioner Victorine,
Planning Director Canfield read the findings of fact into the record.
(1)

The applicant requests Special Use Permit 2026-029 to construct three (3) 345 kV transmission
corridors within Storey County. The transmission corridors, Mira Loma, Comstock Meadows #1
and Comstock Meadows #2 will be located within easements across land zoned Industrial and
Forestry with some easement encroachment on Estates zoned land. This Special Use Permit
addresses the proposed transmission corridors located outside of the Official Master Plan Map
of Storey County Transmission Corridor and the additional height proposed for support towers
beyond that permitted by the applicable zoning district.

(2)

The Special Use Permit conforms to the 2024 Storey County Master Plan for the Industrial,
Resources and Transition from Resources to Industrial designated area in which the subject
property is located. A discussion supporting this finding for the Special Use Permit is provided in
Section 2.D of this staff report and the contents thereof are cited in an approval of this Special
Use Permit. The Special Use Permit complies with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and
standards of the county master plan, the zoning ordinance and any other plan, program, map or
ordinance adopted, or under consideration pursuant to the official notice by the county.

(3)

The proposal location, size, height, operations, and other significant features will be compatible
with and will not cause substantial negative impact on adjacent land uses or will perform a
function or provide a service that is essential to the surrounding land uses, community, and
neighborhood.

(7)

The Special Use Permit, as conditioned, will result in no substantial or undue adverse effect on
adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, public
improvements, public sites or right-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health, safety,
and general welfare, either as they now exist or as they may in the future be developed as a
result of the implementation of the provisions and policies of the county master plan, this title,
and any other plans, program, map or ordinance adopted or under consideration pursuant to an
official notice, by the county, or other governmental agency having jurisdiction to guide growth
and development.

8

(8)

The proposed use in the proposed area will be adequately served by and will impose no undue
burden on any of the improvements, facilities, utilities, or services provided by the county or
other governmental agency having jurisdiction in the county.

(9)

The Special Use Permit, with the recommended conditions of approval, complies with the
requirements of Chapter 17.03.150 – Special Use Permit, Chapter 17.32 F Forestry, Chapter
17.35 Heavy Industrial and Chapter 17.12 – General Provisions of the Storey County Code.

(10)

The project associated with the Special Use Permit involved Public Outreach associated with the
Environmental Impacts Statement (EIS) prepared for the overall Greenlinks West project in the
State of Nevada, along with community meetings hosted by NV Energy within the Highlands and
Mark Twain neighborhoods of Storey County.

Vote: Motion carried by vote (summary: Aye=4, Nay=2).

8. Discussion/Possible Action: Special Use Permit 2026-032 is a request for additional height for transmission towers

beyond the 75-feet in height allowed by the I2 Heavy Industrial zoning district. The applicant proposes a
maximum height of 180-feet. The proposed structures will be located within APN 004-171-31, APN 004-171-26,
APN 004-171-27, APN 004-171-32 and 004-171-28, APN 004-181-11 and APN 004-181-13, McCarran, Storey
County, Nevada.
Planner Jessica Prager summarized the project.

On September 16th, 2025, the Storey County Board of County Commissioners approved Special Use Permit 2025051 to allow for the construction of 345kV transmission lines to be constructed outside of the designated
Transmission Corridor.
This Special Use permit request is to allow for the additional height to be approximately 180 feet for the towers
that were approved with SUP 2025-051. This additional height request is consistent with other approved
transmission lines in the area. The applicant is requesting additional height for the transmission towers to
connect the Transmission Corridor, which was previously approved with SUP 2025-051. This additional height
request would allow all the transmission towers and lines to be uniform with the Transmission Corridor.
The applicant is working with NV Energy to provide electric service to industrial zoned properties adjacent to the
Storey County/Lyon County boundary. Storey County approved the rezoning of the applicant’s property to Heavy
Industrial in January 2024. The approved Transmission Corridor for the new service is not a part of the recognized
Transmission Corridors outlined in the Storey County Master Plan, but Special Use Permit 2025-051 was approved
to allow for the construction of the transmission lines outside of the designated Transmission Corridor. The
previously approved Transmission Corridor crosses both Forestry and Heavy Industrial zoned land that is south of
the Tahoe Reno Industrial Center but is not a part of the Tahoe Reno Industrial Center. This special use permit
addresses the additional height requested on the applicants property that is Heavy Industrial zoned land.
There are approximately 45 poles located outside of the designated Transmission Corridor. These poles will be
located on Heavy Industrial zoned land and will extend approximately 180 feet in height.
All effected parcels are owned by the same entity. There is no access or utility easement required for this Special
Use Permit request as the requested additional height for the towers will be located on parcels owned by the
applicant.

9

No Public or Board Comments.
Motion: In accordance with the recommendation by staff, the Findings of Fact under Section 3.A of this report as
read into the record by staff, and other findings deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission, and in
compliance with the conditions of approval, I Lee Sterrett, recommend approval of Special Use Permit 2026-032 to
adjust the maximum height allowance for 345 kV transmission towers to 180 ft outside of a designated
Transmission Corridor. This Special Use Permit addresses the additional height for the towers located on land
zoned Heavy Industrial. The proposed transmission lines subject to this Special Use Permit will be located within
parcels APN 004-171-26, -27, -28, -31, and -32, APN 004-181-11 and -13, McCarran, Storey County, Nevada.,
Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Sterrett, Seconded by Commissioner Umbach,
Planner Prager read the findings into the record.
1. This approval is for Special Use Permit 2026-032 to adjust the maximum height allowance for 345 kV
transmission towers to 180 ft outside of a designated Transmission Corridor. This Special Use Permit
addresses the additional height for the towers located on land zoned Heavy Industrial. The proposed
transmission lines subject to this Special Use Permit will be located within parcels APN 004-171-26, -27, 28, -31, and -32, APN 004-181-11 and -13, McCarran, Storey County, Nevada..
2. The Special Use Permit conforms to the 2024 Storey County Master Plan for the Heavy Industrial
designated area in which the subject property is located. A discussion supporting this finding for the
Special Use Permit is provided in Section 2.B of this staff report and the contents thereof are cited in an
approval of this Special Use Permit. The Special Use Permit complies with the general purpose, goals,
objectives, and standards of the county master plan, the zoning ordinance and any other plan, program,
map or ordinance adopted, or under consideration pursuant to the official notice by the county.
3. The proposal location, size, height, operations, and other significant features will be compatible with
and will not cause substantial negative impact on adjacent land uses or will perform a function or
provide a service that is essential to the surrounding land uses, community, and neighborhood.
4. The Special Use Permit will result in no substantial or undue adverse effect on adjacent property, the
character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, public improvements, public sites or right-ofway, or other matters affecting the public health, safety, and general welfare, either as they now exist or
as they may in the future be developed as a result of the implementation of the provisions and policies
of the county master plan, this title, and any other plans, program, map or ordinance adopted or under
consideration pursuant to an official notice, by the county, or other governmental agency having
jurisdiction to guide growth and development.
5. The proposed use in the proposed area will be adequately served by and will impose no undue burden
on any of the improvements, facilities, utilities, or services provided by the county or other
governmental agency having jurisdiction in the county.
6. The Special Use Permit, with the recommended conditions of approval, complies with the requirements
of Chapter 17.03.150 – Special Use Permit, Chapter 17.35 - I2 Heavy Industrial and Chapter 17.12 –
General Provisions of the Storey County Code.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous vote (summary: Aye=6).

10

9. Discussion/Possible Action: Special Use Permit 2026-017 to construct a natural gas fueled electrical generating

facility. The electricity generated will be used onsite and will be accessory to the development on the property.
The project includes onsite storage of compressed natural gas. The property is located on land zoned Heavy
Industrial at 8990 USA Parkway, Storey County, NV, Assessor’s Parcel Number 004-171-31.

(Summarized and refined using AI Copilot).
Planning Director Canfield: The applicant is here and has a short presentation. I did want to let the Commission
know too about the public noticing. Because of the natural gas element of the project the State NRS has
requirements for noticing. Staff noticed 30 days ahead of the meeting. On June 9th, notices and emails were sent
to state agencies that are listed in NRS, which include the Department of Business and Industry, the State Fire
Marshal, the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, and Storey County Emergency Management. Staff
only received one comment back from the State Fire Marshal's office just saying that they would defer to the local
fire district for any requirements that would be needed for this project. This was also posted in the newspaper, the
Comstock Chronicle, on June 12th. Notices were also sent to adjacent property owners. NRS requires notices be
sent to each owner of real property located within 1,000 feet of the property in question; the owner, as listed on
the county assessor’s records, of each of the 30 separately owned parcels nearest the property in question, to the
extent this notice does not duplicate the notice. The agenda was posted on July 7th with the staff report online.
Mitch Nelson, Tract, and representing Fleet Data Centers presented the project. The following is a summary of key
points. See power point attached at end of minutes.
Fleet/Data Centers and partners Agreco (power generation) and Stabilis (fuel supply) are proposing a temporary onsite
generation system because Nevada Energy cannot provide permanent utility power soon enough. The facility will sit on
eight acres inside a large, secure data center campus.
The site includes 90 natural-gas generators, fuel tanks, and vaporizers. Liquid natural gas will be delivered by tanker
trucks—about one per hour, up to 20 per day—using several designated routes. The project is remote, and noise studies
show it meets county standards.
Air quality permits required by the state are already submitted; regulators indicated the application meets requirements
and are preparing final approval. The facility uses no consumptive water—only temporary restrooms and
emergency-only fire hydrants.
The broader data center project is a multibillion-dollar investment, and this generator project alone represents roughly
$415 million. It will create around 30 construction jobs and 18 long-term onsite positions.
The applicant agrees with all conditions in the county’s staff report. If approved by the Planning Commission and then
the County Commissioners, construction is expected to begin in early 2027.

11

Public Comment:
Olivia Tanninger, Executive Director of the Sierra Club Toyabe Chapter. We respectfully urge you to deny this SUP
because we do not believe the required findings for approval can be made. While this facility is described as supporting
industrial development, it is in reality a 144-megawatt natural gas plant that would operate onsite, as you heard, to
power private development rather than provide electricity to Nevada's grid. We believe it is the first of its kind, and we
are also engaging in the regulatory process at the Public Utilities Commission. The staff report notes that the facility is
expected to operate longer than what Story County defines as a temporary use, which is why it is being processed as a
permanent special use permit rather than a temporary permit. This project would introduce substantial air pollution. We
have a lot of concerns about the cumulative impact of the industrial development on the air quality, and we're working
with in-depth and others on that as this conversation continues. It would also introduce substantial greenhouse gas
emissions and frequent truck traffic to deliver the fuel. These impacts raise serious questions about whether the project
is truly compatible with surrounding uses and whether it protects the public health, safety, and general welfare as
required by the findings. This proposal also reflects a broader trend of building fossil fuel infrastructure to accommodate
speculative industrial growth before adequate electric infrastructure is in place. Approving long-lived gas generation as a
bridge solution risks extending dependence on fossil fuels and shifting environmental burdens onto local communities in
northern Nevada. We encourage the Commission to require that new industrial development proceed only when
permanent electrical infrastructure is available rather than approving large behind-the-meter gas plants.
For these reasons, the Sierra Club Toiyabe Chapter respectfully asks you to deny this SUP because the required findings
cannot be made at this time. Thank you.
Commissioner Brown: I want to go on record and say that I share the concerns of the Sierra Club President, and I was
going to ask questions along those same lines. One of my questions was just, I think it's important to put into the public
record why we're doing fossil fuels and not solar or something, why do we need to be driving 20 trucks a day back and
forth with carrying a bunch of fossil fuels.
And I also want to know about this temporary situation because I have read, and I don't -- You know, this is hearsay,
maybe, articles, so it may be irrelevant here, but I've read that the demand for energy in this region is actually outpacing
the Greenlink projects. So even if Greenlink is finished in a couple years, hypothetically, which may not be, how do we
know that you won't still need to be running these generators instead of just canceling them, putting them away, and
hooking up to the grid?
Planning Director Canfield: County code does not have Temporary Uses, so we are considering this as permanent. Mitch
Nelson may be able to answer those questions.
Mitch Nelson: Thank you, Commissioner (Brown). Appreciate your concerns. I want to start by just stating, we are
treating it as a permanent permitting process. We are aligning with Staff on that it is permanent in the sense that it's
going to be here for multiple years.
We anticipate that this would kick on in July 2027, after construction, and would be wrapping up and offsite by February
2029. Those dates are anticipated. And the reason being we've gone through the NV Energy process, we've signed all the
agreements to get to a load ramp.
And unfortunately, that load ramp didn't meet the customer demands under the lease. And so this is a bridging solution.
I hear your concern about continuing to install behind the meter infrastructure.
This is intended to bridge a solution to a utility, which we've worked with for years. I also understand your concern on
speculative development. We've been here for three plus years. We've spent hundreds of millions of dollars already at
risk.

12

So, I would not consider us speculatively developing in this area. And we are following the I-2 zoning. We did selectively
pick these sites due to their lack of direct impact to residents.
And then the last note I do want to make is that we are aware of the NDEP standards and we are in the process that was
mentioned by the public. And we're going to have to go through that process to receive our construction permit. So
hopefully that answers some of those questions.
Mitch also added that the intent is for this to be temporary and that these will be pulled off site and the power will be
coming through the NV Energy grid to the substation.
Chairman Negrete asked if there is a possibility to condition the permit to be revoked after a certain date or maybe
having them come back every two years that it’s still actively being used?
Planning Director Canfield: We don’t normally put an end date to a permit that is openly active and working and
complying with County regulations. It is possible to place a condition of approval for an annual or semiannual update as
to where they are in the process (of obtaining grid power).
Commissioners and Staff discussed adding a condition Z. adding an annual update at a regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting, starting between July and September 2027, the applicant shall provide a yearly project update
presentation to the Storey County Planning Commission.
No additional public comment.
Motion: In accordance with the recommendation by staff and adding a condition Z Annual Update as discussed, the
Findings of Fact under Section 3.A of this report as read into the record by county staff, and other findings deemed
appropriate by the Planning Commission, and in compliance with the conditions of approval, I Lee Sterrett, recommend
approval of Special Use Permit 2026-017 to construct a natural gas fueled electrical generating facility. The electricity
generated will be used onsite and is accessory to the proposed development. The project includes onsite storage of
compressed natural gas (CNG). The property is located at 8990 USA Parkway, McCarran, Storey County, NV, Assessor’s
Parcel Number 004-171-31. Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Sterrett, Seconded by Commissioner Umbach,
Planning Director Canfield read the findings into the record.
(1)

This approval is for Special Use Permit 2026-017 to construct a natural gas fueled electrical
generating facility. The electricity generated will be used onsite and is accessory to the
proposed development. The project includes onsite storage of compressed natural gas (CNG).
The property is located at 8990 USA Parkway, McCarran, Storey County, NV, Assessor’s Parcel
Number 004-171-31.

(2)

The Special Use Permit conforms to the 2024 Storey County Master Plan for the McCarran
planning area in which the subject property is located. A discussion supporting this finding for
the Special Use Permit is provided in Section 2.D of this staff report and the contents thereof are
cited in an approval of this Special Use Permit.

(3)

The proposal location, size, height, operations, and other significant features will be compatible
with and will not cause substantial negative impact on adjacent land uses or will perform a
function or provide a service that is essential to the surrounding land uses, community, and
neighborhood.

13

(4)

The Special Use Permit, as conditioned, is not expected to result in substantial or undue adverse
effects on adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking,
public improvements, public sites or right-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health,
safety, and general welfare, either as they now exist or as they may in the future be developed
as a result of the implementation of the provisions and policies of the county master plan, this
title, and any other plans, program, map or ordinance adopted or under consideration pursuant
to an official notice, by the county, or other governmental agency having jurisdiction to guide
growth and development.

(5)

The proposed use in the proposed area will be adequately served by and will impose no undue
burden on any of the improvements, facilities, utilities, or services provided by the county or
other governmental agency having jurisdiction in the county.

(6)

The Special Use Permit, with the recommended conditions of approval, complies with the
requirements of the Storey County Zoning Code, Chapters 17.03.150 – Special Uses, and 17.35 –
I2 Heavy Industrial Zone

Vote: Motion carried by unanimous vote (summary: Aye=4, Nay=2).
10. Discussion/Possible Action: Special Use Permit 2026-018 to construct a natural gas fueled electrical generating

facility. The electricity generated will be used on adjacent properties owned and/or controlled by the applicant.
The project includes onsite storage of compressed natural gas. The property is located within the Tahoe Reno
Industrial Center at 2300 Peru Drive, McCarran, Storey County, NV, Assessor’s Parcel Number 005-012-73.
Mitch Nelson, of Tract and representing Fleet Data Centers: This request is similar to the preceding request, however
this property is on Peru Drive and is part of the Tahoe Reno Industrial Center. There will be a bit more truck traffic
for this site, approximately 3 trucks per hour. See power point attached at end of minutes.
Public Comment: Olivia Tanager with Sierra Club Toiyabe Chapter. Asks that the Commission deny this special use
permit and would apply the same comments she made to the previous request.
Planning Director Canfield: Just to add to the record, the same noticing requirements were followed as the last
request. One adjacent property owner contacted Staff to ask for an owner contact regarding some drainage
things. They did not have any concerns with the project request.
Commissioner Umbach: Doesn’t think the added condition of an annual update is needed in this case because it is
different in that it’s supporting construction that is already there.
Motion: In accordance with the recommendation by staff, Findings of Fact under Section 3.A of this report as read
into the record by county staff, and other findings deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission, and in
compliance with the conditions of approval, I Lee Sterrett, recommend approval of Special Use Permit 2026-018 to
construct a natural gas fueled electrical generating facility. The electricity generated will be used on adjacent
properties owned and/or controlled by the applicant. The project includes onsite storage of compressed natural
gas (CNG). The property is located within the Tahoe Reno Industrial Center at 2300 Peru Drive, McCarran, Storey
County, NV, Assessor’s Parcel Number 005-012-73., Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Sterrett, Seconded
by Commissioner Umbach,

14

Planning Director Canfield read the findings of fact into the record.
(1)

This approval is for Special Use Permit 2026-018 to construct a natural gas fueled electrical
generating facility. The electricity generated will be used on adjacent properties owned and/or
controlled by the applicant. The project includes onsite storage of compressed natural gas
(CNG). The property is located within the Tahoe Reno Industrial Center at 2300 Peru Drive,
McCarran, Storey County, NV, Assessor’s Parcel Number 005-012-73.

(2)

The Special Use Permit conforms to the 2024 Storey County Master Plan for the McCarran
planning area in which the subject property is located. A discussion supporting this finding for
the Special Use Permit is provided in Section 2.D of this staff report and the contents thereof are
cited in an approval of this Special Use Permit.

(3)

The proposal location, size, height, operations, and other significant features will be compatible
with and will not cause substantial negative impact on adjacent land uses or will perform a
function or provide a service that is essential to the surrounding land uses, community, and
neighborhood.

(4)

The Special Use Permit, as conditioned, is not expected to result in substantial or undue adverse
effects on adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking,
public improvements, public sites or right-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health,
safety, and general welfare, either as they now exist or as they may in the future be developed
as a result of the implementation of the provisions and policies of the county master plan, this
title, and any other plans, program, map or ordinance adopted or under consideration pursuant
to an official notice, by the county, or other governmental agency having jurisdiction to guide
growth and development.

(5)

The proposed use in the proposed area will be adequately served by and will impose no undue
burden on any of the improvements, facilities, utilities, or services provided by the county or
other governmental agency having jurisdiction in the county.

(6)

The Special Use Permit, with the recommended conditions of approval, complies with the
requirements of the 1999 Storey County Zoning Code, Chapters 17.62 – Special Uses, and 17.37
– Heavy Industrial Zone.

Vote: Motion carried by unanimous vote (summary: Aye=4, Nay=2).
11. Discussion/For Possible Action: Determination of next planning commission meeting.

Motion: Next planning commission meeting to be tentatively held on August 20, 2026, at 6:00 P.M. at the Storey
County Courthouse, District Courtroom, Action: Approve, Moved by Commissioner Brown, Seconded by
Commissioner Sterrett, Vote: Motion carried by vote (summary: Aye=6).
No Public Comment
12. Correspondence (No Action) – Letter of opposition to the Greenlink project received 7-16-26. Attached at end of
Minutes.
13. Public Comment (No Action) – None
14. Staff Report (No Action) – None

15

15. Board Comments (No Action) – None
16. Adjournment (No Action) - The meeting was adjourned at 9:11 p.m.
To obtain a recording of the meeting please email [email protected] or call the office at 775.847.1144
Respectfully Submitted, By Lyndi Renaud

16

Greenlink Nevada Transmission Project
Common Tie Facilities
Storey County
Planning Commission
Presented By:

Charles Hutchinson, AICP
Permitting Manager
WSP, Inc.
July 16, 2026
1

Agenda
• Introductions
• Greenlink Nevada Transmission Project
– Overview
– Timeline
– Greenlink West / Common Tie NEPA Process

• Common Tie Facilities
–
–
–
–

Overview
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County
Local, State, and Federal Government Permits/Authorizations
Schedule

• Project Contact Information
• Questions & Answers

2

Greenlink Nevada Transmission Project
Overview
• Greenlink West
–

Northwest to Walker River (Fort Churchill) 525 kV Transmission Line
•

Northwest to Sagebrush 525 kV Transmission Line

•

Esmeralda to Sagebrush 525 kV Transmission Line

•

Esmeralda to Walker River 525 kV Transmission Line

–

Harry Allen to Northwest 525 kV Transmission Line

–

Northwest Substation expansion

–

Sagebrush 525/230 kV Collector Substation

–

Esmeralda 525/230 kV Collector Substation

• Common Tie
–

Walker River (Fort Churchill) 525/345/230/120 kV Substation

–

Mira Loma to Walker River (Fort Churchill) 345 kV Transmission Line

–

Comstock Meadows to Walker River (Fort Churchill) #1 345 kV Transmission Line

–

Comstock Meadows to Walker River (Fort Churchill) #2 345 kV Transmission Line

• Greenlink North
–

Lander to Walker River (Fort Churchill) 525 kV Transmission Line

–

Lander 525/230 kV Collector Substation

–

Lander to Robinson Summit 525 kV Transmission Line
3

Greenlink Nevada Transmission Project
Overview (continued)
• Purpose
– Redundancy
•

System components – transmission lines and substations – keep power
flowing across the system in case of faults or during scheduled
maintenance

– Resiliency
•

Greenlink Nevada’s telecommunications system connects its transmission
lines and substations to NV Energy’s control center for restoring power
during emergency conditions, including severe weather

– Reliability
•

Greenlink Nevada will provide a second critical statewide transmission
connection, improving electric reliability across Nevada, and reducing the
need to import electricity from other states

• Key Considerations
– Nevada Senate Bill 448
•

NV Energy is required to place system components into service by
December 31, 2028

– Being designed to handle current and future customer needs
•

Current system cannot support additional electricity needs

– Primary purpose is capacity and reliability
•

All major projects connecting into Greenlink must conduct interconnection
studies to determine if capacity is available and identify what upgrades, if
any, would be needed to provide service
4

Greenlink Nevada Transmission Project
Timeline
• Overall Project Start
– July 20, 2020
•

NV Energy filed Joint Application with PUCN to amend its 2018 Integrated Resource Plan

– March 22, 2021
•

PUCN granted NV Energy approval for Project components

– July 2021
•

Nevada Governor signed Senate Bill 448

• Greenlink West Transmission Project
– May 2022 – September 2024
•

BLM NEPA Process

– September 2024 – Present
•

State and local government permitting

• Greenlink North Transmission Project
– May 2023 – October 2026
•

BLM NEPA Process

– Summer 2026 – Winter 2027
•

State and local government permitting
5

Greenlink West / Common Tie
NEPA Process
• May 2, 2022
– BLM published Notice of Intent to prepare Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) / Resource Management Plan (RMP)
Amendment for Greenlink West Transmission Project, which includes Common Tie facilities

• May 26, 2023
– BLM published Draft EIS / RMP Amendment for public review and comment

• June 14, 2024
– BLM published Final EIS / RMP Amendment for public review and comment

• September 8, 2024
– BLM published Record of Decision

• Project Documents
– https://eplanning.blm.gov/
– NEPA Number: DOI-BLM-NV-0000-2022-0004-EIS
Document Site Page

6

Greenlink West / Common Tie
NEPA Process (continued)
• Consultation and Coordination
– Public Input Workshops
•

June 2021

•

November 2021

•

February 2022

Government-to-Government Coordination
May 2021 – January 2024:
BLM coordinated with 35 tribes via
consultation letters and meetings

– Public Scoping Comment Period
•

May 2, 2022 – June 2, 2022

•

Notifications sent to 298 individuals, agencies, organizations, and Native American Indian Tribes

– In-Person Public Scoping Meetings
•

April 20, 2022 in Reno: 17 attendees

– Public Comment Period for Draft EIS/RMP Amendment
•

90-Day Comment Period

•

In-Person Public Meetings: July 11, 12, 23, 2023

•

Virtual Meetings: June 15, 2023 and August 2, 2023

– Public Protest Period for Final EIS/RMP Amendment
•

30-Day Public Protest Period

•

60-Day Governor’s Consistency Review

7

Greenlink West / Common Tie
NEPA Process (continued)
• Identify and Evaluate Proposed Action and Alternatives
• Identify and Evaluate Cumulative Impacts
• Analyze Impacts on Affected Resources
– Public Health and Safety
– Federally Listed Species
– Special Status Species
– Bald and Golden Eagles
– General Wildlife
– General Vegetation
– Cultural Resources
– Native American Religious Concerns
– Paleontological Resources
– Earth Resources
– Air Quality, Climate Change, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
– Special Designation Areas
– National Historical Trails
– Land Use, Realty, and Indian Trust Assets
– Land Use Amendments in the RMP
– Water Resources
– Visual Resources
– Socioeconomics

8

Greenlink West / Common Tie
NEPA Process (continued)
• Appendices to the Final EIS / RMP Amendment
– A: List of Relevant Actions and Authorities
– AA: Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from
Detailed Analysis

– M: National Historic Trails Inventory and Assessment
Report
– N: County Master Plans

– AB: Other Resource-Uses Analyzed in Detail

– O: City Master Plans

– B: NV Energy Preliminary Plan of Development

– P: BLM Visual Information

– C: Environmental Management Measures

– Q: National Park Service VIA Information

– D: NV Department of Agriculture Noxious Weeds List

– R: Greenlink IMPLAN Analysis

– E: Vegetation Analysis Tables

– S: BLM Socioeconomic Data

– F: Federally Listed Species Considered

– T: CEAAs and RFFAs Table

– G: Raven Management Plan

– U: Proposed Action Legal Description

– H: Bird and Bat Conservation Strategy

– V: Cultural Resources and Section 106 Compliance

– I: Special Status Species Considered

– W: Air Emissions

– J: Soil Orders Table

– X: Socioeconomic References

– K: Historic Properties Treatment Plan

– Y: Impacts on Existing Inventoried Lands with
Wilderness Characteristics

– L: Paleontological Resources Mitigation Plan

– Z: Public Comments and Responses, Part 1 – Part 18

9

Common Tie Facilities
Overview

Proposed Transmission Lines

Existing Transmission Lines

----------------------------------------------------------------Proposed Substation

Existing Substation

Optical Amplifier Sites

Microwave Tower Sites

10

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County

Proposed Transmission Lines
Existing Transmission Lines
Storey County Transmission
Corridor

Proposed Substation
----------------------------

Existing Substation
11

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County
Do
Boundary

West-wide
Energy
Corridor

12

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County
Do
Boundary

West-wide
Energy
Corridor

13

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County
Virginia City Highlands and Surrounding Area
Do
Proximity to Project Transmission Lines
Detail Map 3. Distance from Lagomarsino Petroglyphs to Proposed 345 kV Mira LomaBoundary
– Walker River Transmission Line

West-wide
Energy
Corridor

14

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County
Typical 345 kV Transmission Structures

H-Frame Tangent Structure
Height Range: 85’-125’ Typical
160’ Maximum

3-Pole Dead-End and Angle Structures
Height Range: 75’-140’

15

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County

Photo Simulation of Transmission Line Routes near Mark Twain
Photograph
Location
•

Edith Lane

Distance to
proposed
transmission
lines = 3 miles

16

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County
Photo Simulation along Edith Lane

17

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County
Photo Simulation of Transmission Line Route near Virginia City Highlands
Photograph
Location
•

Lousetown
Road at
Cartwright
Road

Distance to
proposed
transmission
line = 3 miles

18

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County
Photo Simulation along Cartwright Road

19

Common Tie Facilities
Proposed Project Facilities in Storey County

• Proposed Transmission Line Routes

Do
Boundary

•

Mira Loma – Walker River 345 kV Transmission Line extends 15.6 miles across
private land in Storey County.

•

Comstock MeadowsEnergy
– Walker River #1 345 kV Transmission Line extends 12.1
miles across private Corridor
land in Storey County.

•

Comstock Meadows – Walker River #2 345 kV Transmission Line extends 3.9
miles across private land in Storey County.

West-wide

• Proposed Telecommunications Facilities
•

Optical Amplifier Site: new amplifier site at existing Comstock Meadows Substation

20

Storey County
Permits/Authorizations
Storey County Permitting Timeline – Land Use Permitting
•

3/31/2023: Meeting with Planning Director regarding NEPA process and status.

•

7/24/2023: NV Energy presentation to Virginia City Highlands community regarding general utility
concerns and the Greenlink Nevada Transmission project.

•

2/13/2024: Meeting with Planning Director to review Project timeline, NEPA schedule, and local
government permitting activities.

•

10/16/2024: Meeting with Planning Director to provide update on Project schedule and landowner
negotiations.

•

1/28/2025: NV Energy on-site tours of Virginia City Highlands and Mark Twain areas to prepare
photo simulations.

•

2/5/2025: Pre-Application meeting with Planning Director to confirm requirements for Special Use
Permit (SUP) application and County review and approval process.

•

3/18/2025: Mark Twain Town Hall Meeting to provide Project updates.

•

3/19/2025: Virginia City Highlands Town Hall Meeting to provide Project updates.

•

5/6/2025: NV Energy site visit to petroglyphs north of Virginia City Highlands.

•

6/4/2025: Pre-Application follow-up meeting with Planning Director and County Manager.
21

Storey County
Permits/Authorizations
Storey County Permitting Timeline – Land Use Permitting
•

8/7/2025: Meeting with Planning Director and County Manager to discuss County
requirement for Landowner Affidavits in support of SUP.

•

11/12/2025: NV Energy submitted SUP Application to County.

•

11/13/2025: SUP Application deemed incomplete due to lack of signed property owner
affidavits required per Section 17.03.150 of the Storey County Code.

•

5/14/2026: NV Energy meeting with Planning Director, County Manager to provide
update on status of private property easement acquisition efforts by NV
Energy needed to satisfy Storey County Code requirements.

•

6/1/2026: NV Energy resubmitted SUP Application.

•

7/16/2026: Storey County Planning Commission Public Hearing for SUP Application.

•

7/21/2026: Storey County Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing for SUP
Application.
22

Lyon County
Permits/Authorizations
Lyon County Permitting Timeline – Land Use Permitting
•

2/7/2025: Pre-Application Meeting. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required to
construct, operate, and maintain the Project’s facilities in unincorporated Lyon
County.

•

4/21/2025: NV Energy submitted CUP Application. Lyon County required signed property
owner affidavits to deem Application complete.

•

Summer 2025 – Spring 2026: NV Energy coordinated with property owners for signed
affidavits and easements.

•

4/21/2026: NV Energy resubmitted CUP Application for Project facilities between Walker
River Substation and US Highway 50. Resubmitted CUP Application included
signed property owner affidavits and/or easements.

•

6/10/2026: Lyon County Planning Commission recommended approval of CUP
Application.

•

7/2/2026: Lyon County Board of County Commissioners approved CUP Application.

•

8/6/2026: Lyon County Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing for Amendment
to CUP Application. Amendment will include Project facilities north of US
Highway 50 to the Storey County boundary.
23

City of Reno
Permits/Authorizations
City of Reno Permitting Timeline – Land Use Permitting
• 2/10/2025: Pre-Application Meeting
• 7/14/2025: NV Energy submitted CUP application to City of Reno.
• 6/22/2026: NV Energy resubmitted CUP application to City of Reno.
• 8/19/2026: City of Reno Planning Commission hearing on CUP Application.
• 10/21/2026: City of Reno City Council hearing on CUP Application.
• Project is deemed Project of Regional Significance, which will require review
and approval of Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency.

24

State Government
Permits/Authorizations
•

State of Nevada
• Nevada Division of Environmental Protection
•
•
•
•

Section 401 Water Quality Certification
Section 402 Construction General Permit for Stormwater Discharges
Surface Area Disturbance Permit
Working in Waterways Temporary Permit

• Nevada Division of Forestry
• Take/Collection Permit for Rare Plants

• Nevada Division of State Lands
• Right-of-Way Permit for crossing Carson River

• Nevada Department of Transportation
• Right-of-Way / Occupancy / Encroachment Permit for crossing state and federal highways

• Public Utilities Commission of Nevada
• Utility Environmental Protection Act (UEPA) Permit to Construct
25

Federal Government
Permits/Authorizations
• Bureau of Land Management
•
•
•
•

Record of Decision for Environmental Impact Statement
Right-of-Way Grant for Project Operation and Maintenance Activities
Short-Term Right-of-Way Grant for Project Construction Activities
Notice to Proceed

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
• Section 404 Permit for impacts to Waters of the U.S.

• Federal Aviation Administration
• Obstruction Evaluation for transmission line structure locations

26

Project Schedule
Local, State, and Federal Permitting:
2025 – 2026
Construction in Storey County:
Fall 2026 – Fall 2027

–

At the peak of construction, the
current estimate is between 200400 people in and around
Storey County; however, this is
subject to change depending on
schedule progression and other
factors.

27

Project Contact Information

Project Contact Email:
[email protected]

Visit us at:
https://www.nvenergy.com/cleanenergy/greenlink-nevada

28

South Valley
Special Use Permit
Storey County Planning Commission
July 16, 2026

FL E E TD AT AC E N T E R S .C O M

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

1

Project Team
Mitch Nelson
Director of Development (Applicant)

Surabhi Dan
Chief Technology Officer (Applicant)

Alex DuBois
Project Manager (Aggreko)

David Hardin
Project Manager (Aggreko)

Mirek Skrzypkowski
Director of Fueling Solutions (Stabilis)

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

2

Project Location: Greater Reno Area

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER

Greater Reno area location map

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

3

Project Location: South Valley Technology
Park

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER

South Valley Technology Park location map

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

4

Background
• Tract (Master Developer) acquired the South Valley property in 2023 and progressed
infrastructure, platting and other development-related approvals to preposition the
site for data center development.
• Fleet (Vertical Developer) acquired the property from Tract in 2026 in order to
construct a data center under a long-term lease.
• To provide adequate power supply, Fleet has contracted with Aggreko to install onsite natural gas generation which will bridge the power that NV Energy will supply to
the project.
• Storey County zoning for this property outlines “Commercial Energy Production” as a
use requiring a Special Use Permit.
• Fleet prepared and submitted a Special Use Permit application on April 9th and, after
working with staff to address comments, is requesting review and approval from the
Storey County Planning Commission.
FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

5

Site Plan: Generation Facilities
• 136 Natural Gas
Generators
• Electrical Distribution
Gear

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER

Generation facility site plan

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

6

Natural Gas Facilities
• 3 Gas Vaporizers
• 40 LNG ISO Tanks
• Delivery Manifold
• Control Trailer
IMAGE PLACEHOLDER

Natural gas facility imagery

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

7

Haul Routes
• The project will receive fuel from
a primary and secondary
location.
• Fuel deliveries will utilize overthe-road truck types.

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER
Haul routes map

• Adequate facilities exist on-site
to facilitate ingress and egress.

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

8

Noise
• The project will meet the
Storey County industrial
zoning code minimum
requirements (84 dB).
• There are no residences
within a mile of the facility.

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER
Noise contour exhibit

• Anticipate 55dba at edge
of property along USA
Parkway

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

9

Air Quality / Environmental Permitting
• The area is attainment for all pollutants.
• A Class 1 Operating Permit to Construct (OPTC) air permit was filed with Nevada
Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP) earlier in 2026. It is expected to be
approved by the end of the year.
• An OTPC permit will be required for construction and Title V Operational permit will be
required for ongoing operations (submitted following construction)
• The OPTC air permit required full evaluation of the generators and the data center for
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) using NDEP-approved methodologies,
and demonstration that the TRIC area can meet Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) Increments — both were completed and included with this application
• Engine emissions will all be controlled using a Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) control
system that reduces NOx, CO and VOCs.

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

10

Water Use / Investment / Timeframe
Water
•

There will be no consistent consumptive water use on the project.

•

There will be fire hydrants adjacent to the proposed facilities (in design)

•

Given the temporary nature of the project, there will not be permanent offices or restroom facilities on-site.

Investment
•

This project will support the $4.6 billion dollars of investment on the Fleet Data Center campus. [ADD JOBS]

•

The anticipated investment in this facility is approximately $415.8mm

•

There will be approximately 30 on-site jobs associated with construction and 18 on-site once operational.

Timeframe
•

7/16 – Planning Commission

•

7/21 – Board of County Commissioners

•

Assuming the project receives approvals on the above the next steps will be to work through the conditions of approval and permitting with
the appropriate entities

•

Construction of the facility would likely commence in early 2027

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

11

Request
• We have coordinated with staff to address all comments on the proposed Special Use
Permit.
• We have no issues or adjustments to the staff report included in your packet.
• We are requesting that the Planning Commission take action to approve the item on
the agenda.
• Thank you.

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

12

Thank you!
FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

13

Appendix

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

14

Visuals

FLEET DATA CENTERS - ALL RI GHTS RESERVED

15

Peru Shelf
Special Use Permit
Presented to: Storey County Planning Commission
July 16, 2026

FLEETDATACENTERS.COM

Project Team
Mitch Nelson
Director of Development (Applicant)

Surabhi Dan
Chief Technology Officer (Applicant)

Alex DuBois
Project Manager (Aggreko)

David Hardin
Project Manager (Aggreko)

Scott Williams
Director (Certarus)

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

2

Project Location: Greater Reno Area

Insert Greater Reno area location map

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

3

Project Location: Peru Shelf Technology Park

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

4

Background
• Tract (Master Developer) acquired the Peru Ridge property in 2023 and progressed
infrastructure, platting and other development-related approvals to preposition the site for
data center development.
• Fleet (Vertical Developer) acquired the property from Tract in 2026 in order to construct a data
center under long-term lease.
• In order to provide adequate power supply to the project, Fleet has contracted with Aggreko
to install on-site natural gas generation which will bridge the power that NV Energy will supply
to the project.
• Storey County zoning for this property outlines “Commercial Energy Production” as a use
requiring a Special Use Permit.
• In order to facilitate the above, Fleet prepared and submitted a Special Use Permit application
on April 9th and, after working with staff to address comments, is requesting review and
approval from the Storey County Planning Commission.

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

5

Site Plan: Generation Facilities
• 136 Natural Gas
Generators
• Electrical
Distribution Gear

Insert generation facility site plan imagery

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

6

Natural Gas Facilities
 40 Active CNG Tanks
 120 Reserve Tanks
 12 Pressure Reduction
Skids (PRS)

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

7

Haul Routes
• The project will
receive fuel from a
primary and
secondary
location.
• Fuel deliveries will
utilize over-the-road
truck types.
• Adequate facilities
exist on-site to
facilitate ingress
and egress.

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

8

Noise
• The project will meet
the Storey County code
maximum requirements
(84 dB).
• There are no residences
within a mile of the
facility.
• Anticipated 55dba at
nearest neighboring
property line.

Insert noise contour image

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

9

Air Quality / Environmental Permitting
• The area is attainment for all pollutants.
• A Class 1 Operating Permit to Construct (OPTC) air permit was filed with Nevada
Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP) earlier in 2026. It is expected to be
approved by the end of the year.
• An OTPC permit will be required for construction and Title V Operational permit will be
required for ongoing operations (submitted following construction)
• The air permit required a full evaluation of the generators and the data center for
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) using NDEP-approved
methodologies.
• It also required proof that the TRIC area can meet the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) Increments with the project. This was completed and included
with the permit application.
• The engine emissions will all be controlled using a Selective Catalytic Reduction
control system that will reduce NOx, CO and VOCs.
FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

10

Water
•

There will be no consistent consumptive water use on the project.

•

There will be fire hydrants adjacent to the proposed facilities (in design)

•

Given the temporary nature of the development, there will not be permanent offices or restroom facilities on-site.

Investment
•

This project will support the $5.4 billion dollars of investment on the Fleet Data Center campus.

•

The anticipated investment in this facility is approximately $1.1 billion.

•

There will be approximately 30 on-site jobs associated with construction and 15 on-site once operational.

Timeframe
•

7/16 – Planning Commission

•

7/21 – Board of County Commissioners

•

Assuming the project receives approvals on the above the next steps will be to work through the conditions of approval and permitting
with the appropriate entities

•

Construction of the facility would likely commence in early 2027

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

11

Request
• We have coordinated with staff to address all comments on the proposed Special
Use Permit.
• We have no issues or adjustments to the staff report included in your packet.
• We believe this project as proposed is in line with the Storey County code and Tahoe
Reno Industrial Center.
• We are requesting that the Planning Commission take action to approve the item on
the agenda.

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

12

Thank you
Peru Shelf — Special Use Permit

Appendix
Additional visuals and discussion materials

Imagery

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

15

Imagery

FL EET DAT A CEN TERS - AL L RI G H TS RE S E RV E D

16

July 16, 2026

Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP

VIA EMAIL

One East Liberty Street
Suite 300
Reno, NV 89501-2128

Storey County Planning Commission
P.O. Box 176
Virginia City, NV 89440
[email protected]
[email protected]

RE:

Lucy C. Crow
Associate
Admitted in Nevada
Direct Dial: 775-321-3454
Direct Fax: 775.823.2929
E-mail: [email protected]

Property Owner’s Objection to NV Energy’s Special Use Permit Application No. 2026-029

Dear Commissioners:
Sunny Hills Ranchos (“Sunny Hills”) is the property owner impacted by NV Energy’s Special Use Permit
Application No. 2026-029 (the “SUP Application”) because NV Energy seeks the County’s permission to
install transmission lines that cross 20 parcels owned by Sunny Hills—without Sunny Hills’ permission
or any legal right to this property. NV Energy cannot satisfy a fundamental prerequisite to its project:
permission of the property owner. On behalf of Sunny Hills, we submit this letter in opposition to the SUP
Application, respond to the staff report prepared by Storey County Planning Staff, and respectfully request
that the SUP Application be denied or further conditioned.
I.

Application Background

NV Energy seeks approval of a Special Use Permit from the Storey County Board of County
Commissioners (the “Board”) to construct, operate, and maintain 30 miles of 345-kilovolt transmission
lines (divided into three segments) and associated facilities in unincorporated Storey County (the
“Project”). The Project is proposed to traverse land zoned Forestry (“F”) and Estate (“E”), where such
transmission facilities are not permitted by right and therefore require approval of the SUP Application.
Sunny Hills’ primary concern relates to the proposed “Mira Loma to Walker River Transmission
Corridor,” a 15.6-mile segment that, according to the application materials, generally follows the boundary
between the Virginia Ranches subdivision and the Sunny Hills Ranchos subdivision (the “Mira Loma
Corridor”).
NV Energy’s SUP Application proposes installing transmission facilities and new spur routes on 20
parcels owned by Sunny Hills that span nearly 820 acres. See SUP Application, App’x D, Table D1. The
SUP Application also contemplates using Sunny Hills’ property for construction access.
II.

The SUP Application Should Be Denied

If the project proceeds, the foregoing would be an unconstitutional taking because Sunny Hills has not
granted NV Energy any rights to undertake this project on its property, nor has NV Energy obtained such
Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP is a member of Womble Bond Dickinson (International) Limited, which consists of independent and autonomous law firms
providing services in the US, the UK, and elsewhere around the world. Each Womble Bond Dickinson entity is a separate legal entity and is not responsible for the
acts or omissions of, nor can bind or obligate, another Womble Bond Dickinson entity. Womble Bond Dickinson (International) Limited does not practice law.
Please see www.womblebonddickinson.com/us/legal-notice for further details.

Storey County Planning Commission
July 16, 2026
Page 2

a right through other means. NV Energy’s SUP Application should be denied because (1) it lacks owner
authorization; thus it is incomplete, (2) raises serious constitutional concerns, and (3) the findings required
for a SUP cannot be met.
a. Without Owner Authorization, the Application Is Incomplete
The SUP Application cannot be processed because NV Energy has failed to secure Sunny Hills’
permission for this project. As a long-standing custom and practice, Storey County requires a Property
Owner’s Affidavit to accompany a development application. See Ex. 1, at 5 (Development Application).
In the Property Owner’s Affidavit, the owner attests they own the property and “have knowledge of, and
agree to, the filing of this application.” Id. NRS 278.02327(1) provides that a land use application “may
not be accepted by the governing body or its designee if the application is incomplete.” Section 17.03.050
of the Storey County Code requires the director to make a preliminary determination regarding the
completeness of an application; if an application is incomplete, it cannot be processed. To process the
SUP Application, the County must first receive a Property Owner’s Affidavit from Sunny Hills because
it owns 20 of the impacted properties spanning 800+ acres. The Planning Department should not have
accepted and processed the application because it is incomplete. Processing this SUP Application is an
arbitrary and capricious departure from Storey County’s code, practices, and customs. Sunny Hills
respectfully requests the Commission deny the SUP Application because it is deficient.
Nonetheless, NV Energy has asserted that, as a public utility, it may seek approval of a Special Use Permit
before obtaining authorization from affected landowners. This runs afoul of NRS 278.02327(1), Storey
County Code § 17.03.050, and Storey County’s long-standing requirements. By applying for a SUP before
securing a right to the property, NV Energy contravenes established procedure. To be sure, NV Energy
could have sought rights to these properties before applying for a SUP; it chose not to do so. County Staff
has recognized that “[NV Energy] does not have either easements or other written permission from each
of the property owners within the project footprint.” Staff Report, at 3. And, County Staff agrees “it is
entirely appropriate for the county to generally not consider SUP applications that are speculative as to
current ownership.” Id. But, County Staff concludes this application is “unique,” and may be allowed
because NV Energy is a public utility. See id. Neither NRS 278.02327(1) nor Storey County Code §
17.03.050 carve out an exception for public utilities. This situation is “unique” only because NV Energy
chose to violate standard procedures by filing an application for a SUP that seeks permission to build upon
land to which it has no legal right.
Sunny Hills likewise objects to the conclusion that NV Energy can address this critical requirement at
some later, undefined time before beginning construction. That position is inconsistent with the County
Code’s threshold completeness requirements. The issue is not whether NV Energy may ultimately acquire
the necessary property interests prior to obtaining grading and building permits. Rather, the question is
whether the SUP Application is complete and eligible for processing in its current form. The Code does
not authorize staff to process an application that lacks requisite information and authorizations under the
condition that such deficiencies may later be cured through post-approval conditions. Indeed, NV Energy
may never obtain a right for this construction through Sunny Hills’ property or NV Energy’s plans could
simply change; in the meantime, Sunny Hills’ property will diminish in value.

Storey County Planning Commission
July 16, 2026
Page 3

b. Issuing a SUP to NV Energy Raises Constitutional Concerns
Approval of the SUP Application also raises significant concerns under Nevada's vested rights and
regulatory taking jurisprudence. Sunny Hills is developing its property and heavily invested in that
endeavor. Neither Sunny Hills nor the County can determine with any certainty how the property owned
by Sunny Hills will be impacted by NV Energy’s extensive construction and the infrastructure it intends
to build.
Nevada courts have long recognized that a developer may acquire vested rights—rights which operate as
constitutional protections against subsequent governmental actions that prohibit or materially impair an
approved project—even before building permits are issued. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Cnty. of Clark, 125
F. Supp. 2d 420, 426 (D. Nev. 1999). In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the United States District Court for the
District of Nevada held that the existence of remaining ministerial requirements, including the issuance
of building permit, does not preclude vesting once discretionary approvals have been secured and
substantial reliance has occurred. Id.
Approval of the SUP Application could provide NV Energy with a basis to later assert vested rights in
connection with development of the Project and, potentially, provide NV Energy with a right to challenge
permits requested by Sunny Hills—even if NV Energy never undertakes this project or severely delays it.
Sunny Hills does not agree that issuing the SUP will vest such rights in NV Energy. However, if vested
rights are later recognized, future efforts by Storey County to prohibit, restrict, or materially impede the
project could expose the County to claims based on vested rights, regulatory takings, or related legal
theories. Viewed in this context, NV Energy’s pursuit of a SUP appears intended, at least in part, to obtain
the discretionary governmental approvals necessary to strengthen its legal position should the County later
determine that the Project is inconsistent with the public interest or otherwise should not proceed. As a
result, granting the requested approval may materially enhance NV Energy’s ability to challenge future
regulatory actions, diminishing the County’s ability to later reject the project.
Approval of the SUP Application before NV Energy’s acquisition of the necessary property owner
authorization affords NV Energy a degree of project certainty without first compensating affected
landowners through negotiated acquisitions. At a minimum, the approval may create uncertainty regarding
the future use, development, and marketability of the Sunny Hills property and further diminish its value.
Such action would result in an unconstitutional taking of Sunny Hills’ property without just compensation.
c. NV Energy Cannot Satisfy the Requisite Findings.
Independent of the above deficiencies, Sunny Hills objects to Planning Staff’s determination that the
required findings for SUP approval are satisfied. Based on the information presently before the County,
NV Energy has not demonstrated that the findings necessary for approval can be made, including, without
limitation, the findings required under Section 17.03.150(D)(1), (2), and (3) of the Storey County Code.
17.03.150(D)(1) – General Purpose, Goals, and Objectives of the County Master Plan: NV Energy’s
application is inconsistent with the guiding principles of the Storey County Master Plan. The Project

Storey County Planning Commission
July 16, 2026
Page 4

undermines the guiding principle of maintaining an appropriate balance between land uses by introducing
a utility corridor that directly conflicts with planned development. The Project would impose significant
financial burdens on Sunny Hills by increasing development costs.
17.03.150(D)(2) – The Project Is Compatible With Adjacent Land: Because NV Energy has failed to
identify where it intends to install the transmission lines with specificity, the County cannot determine
whether the transmission lines are compatible with surrounding land uses. While NV Energy may contend
that this project is “essential” to the surrounding land, it has not met this burden.
17.03.150(D)(3) – No Substantial Harm to Surrounding Properties or the Character of the Neighborhood:
Portions of the proposed transmission lines will run through the existing project. Sunny Hills has
significantly invested in its development, a fact known to NV Energy. Sunny Hills’ investment includes
infrastructure such as roads, which may be impacted by the project. Because NV Energy has failed to
provide sufficient detail in the SUP Application, neither Sunny Hill nor the County can adequately address
the extent of the harm and negative impact on its property, including recent significant infrastructure
investments.
III.

Conclusion

For these reasons, Sunny Hills respectfully requests that the County decline to process or consider the
SUP Application unless and until NV Energy demonstrates that it has obtained the requisite property
owner authorizations for all affected properties. At a minimum, the County should continue consideration
of the SUP Application until NV Energy identifies with specificity the parcels through which the Mira
Loma Corridor is proposed to pass and the corresponding property interests necessary for the Project.
Although the Commission should decline to consider the application, if it is nonetheless inclined to
approve the application, the condition should go further. Not only should the SUP be conditioned on no
construction proceeding without an easement or authorization, but the SUP should be revokable if NV
Energy does not obtain the necessary property interests. The property owners should have the right to
contest the SUP and petition it be revoked to remove the encumbrance on their properties.
Sunny Hills further requests that this correspondence and the objections set forth herein be incorporated
into the administrative record and considered by the Planning Commission and, ultimately, the Board in
connection with any proceedings relating to the SUP Application.
Please do not hesitate to contact our office should you have any questions regarding this correspondence.
Sincerely,
Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP

Lucy C. Crow

STOREY COUNTY
DESIGN GUIDELINES
AND STANDARDS
Final Draft

September 2026

Table of Contents
1.0

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Purpose and Applicability .......................................................................................1
1.2 Goals .....................................................................................................................2
1.3 Document Organization ..........................................................................................2

2.0

GENERAL PROVISIONS........................................................................................................ 3
2.1 Definitions ..............................................................................................................3
2.2 Relationship to the Storey County Code and Comstock Historic District
Construction Standards ...................................................................................................3
2.3 Design Review Exceptions Process .......................................................................4

3.0

GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS ...................................................... 5
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................5
3.2 Site Layout Guidelines and Standards....................................................................5
3.3 Pedestrian Access and Circulation .........................................................................8
3.4 Vehicular Access and Circulation .........................................................................10
3.5 Parking Lot Layout ...............................................................................................13
3.6 Landscaping & Screening.....................................................................................15
3.7 Building Design ....................................................................................................21
3.8 Lighting ................................................................................................................22
3.9 Walls and Fences.................................................................................................23

4.0

NON-RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS ................................... 24
4.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................24
4.2 Building Location ..................................................................................................24
4.3 Parking, Circulation, and Access ..........................................................................26
4.4 Landscaping & Screening.....................................................................................27
4.5 Building Design ....................................................................................................29

5.0

RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS ............................................. 31
5.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................31
5.2 Single-Family Subdivisions and Planned Unit Developments Site Design ............ 31
5.3 Circulation and Parking ........................................................................................34
5.4 Single-Family Dwelling and Accessory Building Design Standards ...................... 38
5.5 Multifamily Building Design and Layout ................................................................39
5.6 Landscaping, Open Space, & Amenities ..............................................................41

Figures

Figure 1: Site Layout ...................................................................................................................7
Figure 2: Pedestrian Access and Circulation ...............................................................................9
Figure 3: Vehicular Access and Circulation ...............................................................................12
Figure 4: Parking Lot Layout .....................................................................................................14
Figure 5: Landscaping and Screening .......................................................................................19
Figure 6: Landscaping and Screening .......................................................................................20
Figure 7: Building Location ........................................................................................................25
Figure 8: Perimeter Landscaping and Screening.......................................................................28
Figure 9: Subdivision and PUD Site Design ..............................................................................33
Figure 10: Circulation and Parking ............................................................................................37

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards – Second Draft| September 2026

Page ii

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose and Applicability
The Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards are intended to promote high-quality,
context-sensitive development that reflects the County’s unique character and enhances the
health, safety, and welfare of residents and visitors. These guidelines and standards provide
a framework for evaluating the design of new development and redevelopment projects,
ensuring consistency with community goals and compatibility with surrounding land uses.
Visual diagrams and examples are provided throughout this chapter to illustrate key
concepts and support consistent interpretation and application of the standards.
These guidelines apply to all new residential and non-residential development projects that
require discretionary review, including but not limited to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Subdivision maps (division into five or more parcels)
Planned Unit Developments (PUDs)
Multifamily residential complexes (consisting of five or more units)
Mixed-use developments for lots greater than .5 acres in size
Commercial developments for lots greater than .5 acres in size
Industrial developments outside of areas subject to development agreements (DA)
and lots greater than .5 acres in size
Exterior remodels or repairs of existing multifamily, mixed-use, commercial,
industrial, or public and institutional developments that exceed 80% of the assessed
value of the land and improvements

The following uses are exempt from the design review requirements:
•
•
•
•
•

Projects governed by an adopted DA are exempt from these guidelines.
Exterior remodels or repairs of existing uses that are less than 80% of the assessed
land and improvement value.
Interior remodels which do not result in substantial changes in the character of the
occupancy or use, or cause greater impact on traffic, water or sewer usage, as
determined by the director.
Repair and maintenance of structures or parking areas constrained by the existing
structure and not altering existing drainage patterns or easements.
Replacement or repair of a structure partially destroyed by fire, flood or other natural
occurrence, when the repair of the structure is determined by the director to be
consistent with the design, use and intensity of the original structure and consistent
with the zoning and master plan designations.

The Design Guidelines and Standards are complementary to the Storey County Code (SCC).
Where there are conflicts between the Design Guidelines and Standards and any other
lawfully adopted rules, regulations, restrictions, or ordinances, the most restrictive or that
imposing the higher standards will govern. Compliance with the Design Guidelines and
Standards occurs through the design review process specified here and referenced in SCC
17.03.135.
Throughout this document, design guidelines are bolded text and design standards are nonbold text beneath the guidelines. Compliance with both design guidelines and standards is
required, however, exceptions from the design standards can be requested. The design

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 1

review process is tiered based on how many exceptions the applicant requests from the
Design Standards:
•

Minor Design Review: For proposals that meet all or nearly all design standards (no
more than four exceptions).

•

Major Design Review: Required for proposals with five or more exceptions from the
design standards.

Whenever a exception is requested, the applicant must remain in compliance with all
applicable design guidelines and the goals in Section 1.2.
All design review is subject to administrative review by the Planning Director and is subject
to the review procedures in SCC Section 17.03.200. The Planning Director at their discretion
may refer Design Review applications to the Planning Commission for review with final
decision by the Board of Commissioners (Board) per SCC 17.03.200(E). In such event, the
Planning Commission must consider the design review application at a public hearing subject
to the review procedures contained in the SCC sections 17.03.050 – 17.03.100. The
Planning Commission and Board must conduct their review, recommendation, and decision
in accordance with the provisions contained in the Design Guidelines and Standards
document.
Applicants must submit all required documentation, including site plans, elevations, and
contextual studies, as part of the design review process.

1.2 Goals
The goals of the Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards are to:
• Preserve and enhance community character by promoting design that reflects the
County’s scenic, historic, and cultural identity as determined by location within the
County. Locations are as detailed within the Storey County Master Plan Section 3.4.
• Ensure compatibility between new development and existing land uses and between
different types of land uses (i.e. residential and commercial) through attention to site
layout, landscape and screening and through thoughtful transitions in scale, massing,
and building design.
• Promote sustainability and water conservation by encouraging xeriscaping, efficient
site design, and integration of natural features.
• Support coordinated pedestrian and emergency access between developments.
• Encourage high-quality building and site design that contributes to a cohesive and
attractive built environment.
• Mitigate adverse impacts such as noise and glare through appropriate screening,
buffering, and lighting standards.
• Provide clear and enforceable standards that guide applicants, staff, and decisionmakers in the review and approval of development proposals.

1.3 Document Organization
The Design Guidelines and Standards are organized into chapters that address both general
provisions and specific design criteria for residential and non-residential development. The
structure of the document is as follows:

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 2

•

Chapter 2: General Provisions include definitions, relationships to the County Code,
and general design guidelines and standards applicable to all development types
subject to the Design Guidelines and Standards.

•

Chapter 3: General Design Guidelines: covers site layout, building design,
landscaping, screening, lighting, and circulation standards applicable to all types of
development.

•

Chapter 4: Non-Residential Design Guidelines and Standards cover site layout,
building design, landscaping, screening, lighting, and circulation standards for
commercial, industrial, and public or institutional projects.

•

Chapter 5: Residential Design Guidelines and Standards Includes standards for
subdivisions, PUDs, multifamily complexes, and single-family homes, addressing site
layout, building design, landscaping, screening, lighting, and circulation standards.

Each chapter is further divided into sections that provide design guidelines and prescriptive
standards. Visual diagrams and figures are included throughout to support interpretation and
application of the guidelines and standards.

2.0 General Provisions
2.1 Definitions
This section will provide definitions specific to the Design Guidelines and Standards where
different or more specific than those in the code.

2.2 Relationship to the Storey County Code and Comstock Historic District
Construction Standards
The Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards are intended to complement, not
replace, the regulatory framework established by the SCC and the Comstock Historic District
Construction Standards. Each of these documents serves a distinct but interconnected
purpose in guiding development within the County.
•

Storey County Code: Establishes the legal requirements for land use, zoning,
subdivision, and building regulations. It includes enforceable standards such as
setbacks, height limits, parking requirements, and use permissions. All development,
including that subject to the Design Guidelines and Standards, must comply with the
applicable provisions of the County Code.

•

Design Guidelines and Standards: Provide additional directions on building design,
site layout, landscaping, screening, lighting, walls and fences, and other designrelated elements. These Design Guides and Standards primarily address elements
on-site and between adjacent development sites, with less attention given to exterior
building design. This document will be used during the design review process to
evaluate the quality and compatibility of proposed developments.

•

Comstock Historic District Construction Standards: Apply specifically to properties
located within the boundaries of the Comstock Historic District. These standards are
intended to preserve the historic character and integrity of Virginia City, Gold Hill,

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 3

and the surrounding areas. The Comstock Historic District Construction Standards
primarily provide standards and guidelines for buildings in the historic district, rather
than elements of site design and layout. If the Design Guidelines and Comstock
Historic District Construction Standards are in conflict, the Comstock standards shall
supersede the design guidelines and standards contained in this document.

2.3 Design Review Exceptions Process
2.3.1

Compliance and Design Exceptions

All development subject to the Design Guidelines and Standards must comply with the
prescriptive design standards outlined in this document. However, flexibility is provided
through a formal Design Exception process for projects that propose alternative approaches
while still meeting the intent of the guidelines.
Compliance Requirements:
• Projects must meet all applicable design standards unless an exception is granted.
• Whenever an exception to a design standard is requested, projects must demonstrate
alignment with the design guidelines portions of this document, which articulate the
County’s design intent for specific topics, as well as the goals in Section 1.2. The
exception request must state why the exception is desired and demonstrate an equal
or better outcome than the intended result of the guideline. In the event that a
development site’s existing conditions prevent compliance, the applicant must
demonstrate why the relevant standard and guidelines cannot reasonably apply to
the development site.
Design Exceptions:
• May be requested when compliance with a standard is infeasible due to site
constraints, alternative or design solutions are proposed that are equal or better than
meeting the design standard for which an exception is requested.
• Must be accompanied by written justification and supporting materials (plans and/or
elevations) demonstrating how the alternative approach meets or exceeds the intent
of the standard as specified in the applicable guidelines.
•

•

Will be evaluated by County staff to confirm that the proposed deviation
accomplishes the following:

o

Achieves the intent of the subject design guideline to the same or better
degree than compliance with the standard

o

Achieves goals and policies of the Master Plan to the same or better degree
than the subject standard

o

Results in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than
compliance with the standard

In the event a design exception is not granted by staff, the applicant has the right to
request review by Planning Commission in a public hearing. Planning Commission
will then recommend approval or denial, and the Board will issue the final decision
in accordance with SCC 17.03.130.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 4

3.0 General
Design
Standards

Guidelines

and

3.1 Introduction
The following design guidelines and standards are applicable to all types of development
that meet the applicability statement contained in section 1.1 of this document and are
intended to direct the layout of buildings and other site elements, and set basic standards
for parking lots, pedestrian access facilities, landscaping onsite and for abutting dissimilar
uses, walls and fences, and lighting. Figures detailing the guidelines and standards are
provided throughout this section to help aid design.

3.2 Site Layout Guidelines and Standards
3.2.1

Buildings should be oriented to the street or primary internal circulation areas.
(Figure 1)

3.2.1.1 The primary building façade shall
face the main street or an internal
public primary drive aisle; or,
If parking is located at the rear of
the site, the main entrance shall
face the parking area, but the
building’s primary façade must still
face the street or drive aisle.
(Figure 1)
3.2.1.1 – Building Facade Orientation
3.2.2

Commercial, public, and multifamily developments on corner lots should orient
buildings to address both street frontages through functional or visual
treatments. (Figure 1)

3.2.2.1 Place the primary entrance oriented to the street corner (Figure 1); or
Provide a paved pedestrian-only connection that is six feet wide and connects from the public
street to the main entrance. (Figure 1)
3.2.3

Parking lots should not dominate the appearance of commercial, multifamily
and public sites as viewed from the public right-of-way. (Figure 1)

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 5

3.2.3.1 Locate commercial, multifamily, and public parking lots behind buildings or no closer to the
street than the primary building. (Figure 1)
3.2.3.2 Where existing conditions, multiple street frontages, or the proposed use prevent rear/side
parking, parking may be placed forward of the building if it is screened consistent with
Section 3.6.
3.2.4

Grading shall be designed to respect the site's natural topography and minimize
abrupt elevation changes at property boundaries.

3.2.4.1 Grading should follow natural contours where feasible to minimize cut‑and‑fill.

3.2.4.2 Avoid creating steep slopes, tall retaining walls, or abrupt grade changes at property
boundaries; use landscape or open space to provide gradual transitions.
3.2.4.3 Grading plans must be provided at the time of design review application submittal and
demonstrate how stormwater will be managed to prevent runoff onto neighboring properties
and minimize erosion.
3.2.4.4 Applicants must provide grading cross sections or diagrams at key transition points to
illustrate how grade changes will be managed in relation to adjacent properties.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 6

Figure 1: Site Layout

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 7

3.3

Pedestrian Access and Circulation

3.3.1

On-site circulation should provide convenient, safe and direct flow of
pedestrians. Conflicts between modes of travel must be minimized through
separation, signage, and design treatments. (Figure 2)

3.3.1.1 Pedestrian walkways must provide direct, continuous connections between all primary
building entrances, parking areas, public sidewalks and public streets. (Figure 2)
3.3.1.2 Pedestrian circulation routes shall be safe and visually distinct from vehicle circulation and
parking areas. (Figure 2)
3.3.1.3 Pedestrian walkways must be a minimum 6-feet in width. (Figure 2)
3.3.1.4 For parking lots greater than 1
acre or with 100 or more parking
stalls, drive aisles shall be
arranged to direct pedestrians
parallel to moving cars . When
this is not feasible, separated
pedestrian walkways must meet
be 6 feet in length and contain one
of the following features:
•

•

Grade separated, elevated
crossway with associated
markings.

3.3.1.4 & 5 – Pedestrian Walkways

Pedestrian
crossing
constructed of a different
material from the surface
parking lot. Striping shall be
used and signaling is
encouraged.

3.3.1.5 Pedestrian walkways must be
visually distinct from vehicle
areas by constructing them of
different materials such as
concrete,
masonry
pavers,
stamped asphalt, or by using
different stains or colors selected
based on site context. (Figure 2)

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 8

Figure 2: Pedestrian Access and Circulation

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 9

3.4 Vehicular Access and Circulation
3.4.1

On-site access and circulation should provide convenient, safe and direct flow
of vehicles. (Figure 3)

3.4.1.1 Vehicle access points from public right-of-way shall be kept to the minimum necessary to
support safe and efficient circulation. Driveway spacing shall meet the minimum standards
as specified in Storey County Code Section 17.12.090. (Figure 3)
3.4.1.2 Joint access between adjacent properties must be provided for commercial, industrial,
multifamily, public, and mixed-use developments whenever an existing easement is stubbed
to a property under development and whenever site constraints allow. Where shared access
is provided, driveways must accommodate turning movements for both sites.
3.4.1.3 Whenever parking areas or drive aisles are connected to adjacent sites, applicants shall
align adjoining driveways and pedestrian connections in a manner that will minimize points
of conflict.
3.4.1.4 Uses requiring or generating
frequent passenger loading and
unloading (e.g., hotels, schools,
medical offices) will provide
designated
loading/unloading
areas consistent with the level and
frequency of loading and unloading
activity based on a traffic study
prepared
by
an
engineer.
Designated
loading/unloading
areas must be oriented such that
pedestrians are not directed into
on-site drive aisles.

3.4.1.4 - Designated Loading/Unloading Area

3.4.1.5 A traffic study may be required for developments that are anticipated to impact the
surrounding street network and transportation system. The study must evaluate traffic
impacts on adjacent neighborhoods, intersections, and regional circulation patterns.
3.4.1.6 All drive aisles and vehicular circulation areas shall be paved with durable, all-weather
materials such as asphalt, concrete, or approved permeable paving systems. Drive aisles
shall not occupy a majority of a lot’s frontage. (Figure 3)
3.4.1.7 Minimum and maximum drive aisle widths shall be as specified in the most recently adopted
IFC for fire apparatus access routes. Drive aisles not used for fire apparatus access shall
have the following minimum widths based on the angle of the parking (Figure 3):
•

20-30 degree stalls: 11 feet.

•

45 degree stalls:: 13 feet.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 10

•

60 degree stalls: 18 feet

•

70 degree stalls 19 feet

•

80 – 90 degree stalls: 24 feet

3.4.1.8 Drive aisles shall not be located between the building and the street. All vehicle maneuvering
must occur entirely within the site. Backing out into the public right-of-way is prohibited.
(Figure 3)

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 11

Figure 3: Vehicular Access and Circulation

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 12

3.5 Parking Lot Layout
3.5.1

Parking lots shall be designed to promote safe vehicular and pedestrian
circulation, minimize visual impacts, and enhance connectivity to adjacent
buildings and uses. (Figure 4)

3.5.1.1 Parking lots exceeding 1 acre or 100 spaces must be divided into smaller, connected areas
using one of the following two options (Figure 4):
•

Landscape islands provided at an average of every 12 parking spaces a minimum of
6 feet wide, curbed; and pedestrian walkways with distinct materials or colors from
vehicular areas.

•

Different paving materials for driveways or parking spaces, and pedestrian walkways
with different paving materials.

3.5.1.2 Parking spaces abutting structures shall be separated by a 6-foot-wide sidewalk or landscape
planter and shall be situated at least two feet from all roof overhangs. (Figure 4)
3.5.1.3 Parking stalls shall not back directly into primary ingress driveways. (Figure 4)
3.5.1.4 The first parking stall parallel to a driveway will be separated by a landscape planter at a
minimum of 10-feet in width. (Figure 4)
3.5.1.5 Parking stall dimensions shall be constructed as follows (Figure 4)::
•

Standard stall (90°): 9 feet wide by 18 feet deep

•

Compact stall (where permitted): 8 feet wide by 16 feet deep

•

Angled stalls (60°): 9 feet wide by 20 feet deep

•

Parallel stalls: 8 feet wide by 22 feet long

Compact spaces may be permitted for up to 25% of the total required parking, unless
otherwise restricted by zoning or use type.
3.5.1.6 Parking lots shall be paved with durable materials such as asphalt, concrete, or approved
permeable paving systems. Gravel or other unpaved surfaces may be permitted only for
temporary or overflow parking areas, subject to approval. (Figure 4)
3.5.1.7 Parking lots located at or above 5,000 feet above sea level must provide a snow removal
plan.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 13

Figure 4: Parking Lot Layout

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 14

3.6 Landscaping & Screening
3.6.1

Parking lot landscaping promotes attractive and functional parking lot
environments that contribute to the aesthetic of the development. (Figure 6)

3.6.1.1 Parking areas adjacent to public streets
or sidewalks shall include a linear
landscape planter with a minimum
width of 6 feet.(Figure 6)
3.6.1.2 Where parking spaces face residential
buildings and along the perimeter areas
of parking lots, screening of at least 36
inches in height shall be provided via a
wall or plantings to block vehicle
headlights and enhance privacy.
(Figure 5)
3.6.2

3.6.1.1 & 2 - Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping

Landscaping materials should provide visual interest, delineation between
onsite uses, and screening between on-site and off-site uses. (Figure 5)

3.6.2.1 Landscaping will be perpetually maintained with prompt removal and replacement of dead
and diseased plants. Irrigation to ensure establishment and maintenance of landscaped
areas must be provided. Drought-tolerant species that use minimal irrigation are required.
3.6.2.2 Where landscaped areas abut vehicle parking or vehicle access, a curb or other form of
barrier will be installed to prohibit vehicle access to landscaped areas. (Figure 5)
3.6.2.3 Outdoor storage should be fully screened from public view using solid fences, decorative
walls, hedges, or other opaque screening elements. (Figure 5)
3.6.3

Landscaping materials shall be climate and context sensitive and require little
or no water to maintain. (Figure 5)

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 15

3.6.3.1 Vegetation must be climate-appropriate and
require minimal irrigation once established.
Xeriscaping or native landscaping is
required, except in parks, playgrounds,
school grounds, and other active recreation
areas.
3.6.3.2 Street trees adjacent to sidewalks, parking
lots, or streets shall be non-fruit-bearing.
(Figure 6)
3.6.3.3 If non-native landscaping is used that requires
ongoing watering, water-efficient systems must
be utilized.
3.6.3.4 The use of durable, non-living materials can
be provided as an alternative to living plant
materials, so long as they complement the
surrounding natural landscape and aesthetic.
Synthetic turf shall not be used to satisfy
landscaping requirements. (Figure 5)

3.6.3.1 & 2 - Native Plantings and Street
Trees

3.6.3.5 Trees shall be staked in accordance with the International Society of Arborists standards.
3.6.3.6 Minimum tree sizes at installation:
•

Street, parking lot, and screening trees: 2-inch caliper, 5-foot spread

•

Other deciduous trees: 1.5-inch caliper

•

Evergreen trees: 6-foot minimum height

3.6.3.7 Shrubs and hedges, if planted for screening, must be a minimum 5-gallon size at planting.
Screening hedges must be maintained to achieve 80% opacity within three years. Vines must
be at least 2 feet tall at planting and may only be used with fences or walls.
3.6.3.8 Landscaping used to screen utilities, refuse, storage, and similar features must achieve 80%
opacity within three years.
3.6.3.9 Landscaping in vision clearance areas must comply with SCC 17.12.050. (Figure 6)
3.6.4

Existing trees should be preserved where they will not conflict with proposed
site improvements. If removal is necessary and site improvements cannot be
adjusted to preserve trees, replacement trees should be provided at a rate
proportional to the size of the removed tree.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 16

3.6.4.1 Existing trees 6 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) or greater must be preserved unless
they are dead, diseased, or site design cannot be adjusted to make preservation possible.
3.6.4.2 Existing trees and other vegetation that are preserved can substitute for screening
requirements in the Design Guidelines and Standards if they provide a similar level of
screening.
3.6.4.3 Trees 6-inches dbh or greater that are removed must be replaced with new native trees of
an equal size caliper dbh.
3.6.5

Plants and trees should be selected and placed to complement adjacent
structures and provide shading, screening, and/or buffering. (Figure 5)

3.6.6

All ground-mounted mechanical equipment, roof-mounted equipment, storage
areas, and accessory structures should be thoughtfully screened to minimize
visual impact from public vantage points and neighboring properties. (Figure 5)

3.6.6.1 All
ground-mounted
mechanical
equipment—such as transformers, HVAC
units, electrical boxes, and backflow
preventers—must be fully screened from
view from all public vantage points,
including streets, sidewalks, adjacent
properties, and pedestrian pathways.
(Figure 5)

3.6.6.2 Screening shall meet the following
minimum standards (Figure 5):

3.6.6.1 & 2 - Ground Equipment Screening

•

Screening shall be constructed of durable materials (e.g., masonry, concrete, or
materials matching the primary structure) and be a minimum of 6 feet in height or tall
enough to fully conceal the equipment, whichever is greater. All screening methods
must match adjacent buildings to the greatest extent possible.

•

If landscaping is used for screening, it must include dense, year-round plantings that
are a minimum height of 4 feet at the time of planting and are expected to fully screen
the equipment within three years to 80% opacity.

•

Subterranean vaults are encouraged where feasible.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 17

3.6.6.3 Rooftop equipment for commercial or industrial buildings, including satellite dishes, must be
screened using parapet walls or drop wells consistent in color and texture with the primary
building. “Picket fence” screening is not permitted.
3.6.6.4 Chain-link fencing is prohibited unless fully screened and finished with black vinyl coating.
3.6.7

Retention and detention basins adjacent to public or residential areas are
landscaped and screened with appropriate fencing unless designed for
recreational use.

3.6.7.1 When an on-site retention/detention basin is adjacent to a residential area, commercial area,
or public right-of-way, the basin must be landscaped. Landscaping must include:
•

Drought resistant and native plantings at least six (6) feet high.

•

Non-buoyant materials (e.g., cobble rock, low-spreading shrubs).

•

Native grasses and turf may be used for recreational purposes when stormwater is
not present.

The landscape design will provide adequate access for maintenance of the basin. If fencing
is proposed, decorative fencing must completely enclose the basin. Chain-link fencing of any
kind is prohibited.
3.6.7.2 Basins that face public rights of way or are intended for recreational use may remain
unfenced if they meet both of the following conditions:
•

Side slopes are 2:1 or flatter, and

•

The maximum water depth is 3 feet or less.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 18

Figure 5: Landscaping and Screening

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 19

Figure 6: Landscaping and Screening

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 20

3.7 Building Design
3.7.1

Commercial, multifamily, institutional, mixed-use and industrial buildings
should incorporate materials and features that enhance visual interest,
durability, and compatibility with surrounding development.

3.7.1.1 Blank or monotonous walls and facades should be avoided. For every 30 linear feet of
uninterrupted wall surface, at least two of the following design elements must be used:
•

Changes in material (e.g.,
stone, brick, wood siding)

•

Color
blocking
or
contrasting paint schemes

•

Architectural
features
such
as
windows,
trellises, awnings, or
arcades

•

Vertical or horizontal
shifts in the wall plane
(minimum 2 feet in depth
or projection)

•

Parapet eaves or other
roofline variations
3.7.1.1 - Building Facade Design

These elements must be integrated in a way that is consistent with the overall style of the
building.
3.7.1.2 New buildings and additions to existing structures shall be designed to complement adjacent
development in terms of scale, massing, rooflines, and setbacks. To ensure compatibility,
applicants must submit a “Surrounding Conditions Plan” that illustrates the proposed design
in relation to adjacent buildings.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 21

3.7.1.3 Exterior building walls will include one or more of the following materials:
• stucco
• brick
• wood
• durable composite lap or bat-and-board style siding
• stones
• tinted/textured masonry units.
Smooth-faced concrete block, panel pressboard and composite siding, and fabricated metal
are discouraged, but may be acceptable when used as accents to a building. Bright/neon
colors are also discouraged.
3.7.1.4 Awnings, parapet eaves or other similar decorative features will provide a minimum of 8 feet
of vertical clearance above grade.
3.7.1.5 Aluminum window frames must be painted or anodized to match or complement the color
scheme of the building.
3.7.1.6

Reflective, untreated metal roofs are prohibited. All exposed metal roof surfaces must be
treated and use flat, durable, non-gloss finishes that complement the building’s exterior
colors.

3.7.1.7 Accessory structures will be architecturally compatible with the primary building(s).

3.8 Lighting
3.8.1

Lighting fixtures must be thoughtfully integrated into the building and site
design, with attention to style, environmental impact, and energy performance.

3.8.1.1 All lighting shall be contained within the subject property and avoid casting onto adjacent
properties to the greatest extent possible.
3.8.1.2 All lighting fixtures shall be compatible with the building design and site character. Fixtures
must be coordinated in terms of style, color, and scale.
3.8.1.3 Lighting shall comply with International Dark-Sky Association (IDA) principles and SCC 8.02.
Fixtures must be fully shielded or hooded to direct light downward and prevent upward light
spill.
3.8.1.4 LED or other energy-efficient lighting technologies shall be used. Fixtures must be equipped
with timers, motion sensors, or photocells where appropriate to reduce energy consumption.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 22

3.9 Walls and Fences
3.9.1

Walls and fences must be designed as integral components of the site and
building design, using high-quality materials and treatments that complement
the overall development and minimize visual disruption.

3.9.1.1 Standalone walls and fences shall be designed in accordance with SCC 17.12.060 with the
exception of fences proposed within the Comstock Historic District which shall comply with
the Comstock Historic District Construction Standards.
3.9.1.2 All walls and fences must be maintained in good condition, free of damage, graffiti, or
deterioration.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 23

4.0 Non-Residential Design Guidelines and
Standards
4.1 Introduction
The design criteria within this chapter are intended as a reference to assist the designer in
understanding the county's goals for non-residential (commercial, industrial, and institutional
projects) and mixed-use use developments.

4.2 Building Location
4.2.1

Commercial buildings adjacent to or across the street from residential zones
must be designed to reduce potential conflicts and maintain neighborhood
character.

4.2.1.1 Loading and docking areas must be located at the rear or side of buildings, away from public
rights-of-way and residential property lines. (Figure 7)
To reduce visibility and enhance compatibility with surrounding uses:

4.2.2

•

Screening is required when loading and docking areas are visible from public rightsof-way or adjacent residential properties. Screening may include a combination of
landscaping, walls, or fencing, or other compatible design elements.

•

A minimum setback of 20 feet shall be maintained between loading/docking areas
and any adjacent residential use or zone. This setback must be landscaped with
native or drought tolerant species or include xeriscaping in compliance with Sections
3.6 and 4.4.

Building placement should support safe and efficient on-site and off-site
circulation patterns for vehicles and pedestrians. (Figure 7)

4.2.2.1 Commercial buildings shall be clustered within designated areas to promote walkable
shopping plazas, shared open spaces, and coordinated site design. (Figure 7)
4.2.2.2 The orientation and placement of buildings must facilitate efficient access to loading areas
while maintaining compliance with screening and circulation requirements. (Figure 7)

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 24

Figure 7: Building Location

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 25

4.3 Parking, Circulation, and Access
4.3.1

Pedestrian circulation systems must be clearly defined, continuous, and
integrated into the overall site design to support walkability and connectivity.

4.3.1.1 Sidewalks will be provided along the full length of the building featuring customer entrances
and along any facade facing public parking areas.
4.3.1.2 Site circulation shall not interfere with pedestrian access, public sidewalks, or on-site
walkways.
4.3.2

Drive-thru uses must be integrated into the site to avoid conflicts with drive
aisles and impacts to adjacent uses.

4.3.2.1 Drive-thru lanes, drive-in parking, and associated queuing areas shall not be located
adjacent to or within 50 feet of existing or planned residential uses or zones.
4.3.2.2 Drive-thru lanes shall not be located between the building and the public street frontage,
except where no feasible alternative exists due to site constraints. In such cases, enhanced
screening and pedestrian amenities must be provided.
4.3.2.3 Drive-thru windows and speaker boxes shall be oriented away from residential properties
and shielded with acoustic barriers or landscaping to reduce noise.
4.3.2.4 Lighting in drive-thru areas shall be fully shielded and directed away from residential
properties.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 26

4.4 Landscaping & Screening
4.4.1

Perimeter landscaping should be incorporated along property edges to soften
site boundaries, provide visual screening, and ensure compatibility with
neighboring properties. (Figure 8)

4.4.1.1 Perimeter landscaping is required along all property lines where differing land uses abut,
unless adjacent sites are fully integrated through shared access, parking, or drive aisles, or
where no building setback is provided. (Figure 8)
•

Where commercial or industrial abut one another, a minimum 10-foot wide landscape
buffer shall be provided.

•

Where commercial uses abut multifamily uses (or vice versa), a minimum 10-footwide landscaped buffer shall be provided.

•

Where commercial or industrial uses abut single-family residential zones or uses or
where industrial uses abut multifamily, a minimum 15-foot wide landscape buffer
shall be provided.

The landscape buffer shall include:
•

A continuous sight-obscuring fence or wall at least 6 feet in height; and

•

One canopy tree every 30 linear feet.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 27

Figure 8: Perimeter Landscaping and Screening

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 28

4.5 Building Design
4.5.1

Commercial buildings should incorporate design elements that reflect a
pedestrian-friendly scale.

4.5.1.1 At least 25% of the primary street-facing façade shall consist of transparent windows or doors
to promote visual interest, pedestrian engagement, and natural surveillance.
4.5.1.2 At least three of the following commercial building design elements shall be incorporated:
•

Street-level windows and doors
scaled between 3 and 8 feet in
height

•

Awnings or canopies projecting
3 to 6 feet for shade and visual
interest

•

Arcades or colonnades with
clear heights between 10 and
14 feet

•

Plazas, courtyards, or seating
areas shall be a minimum of
100 square feet

•

Roof overhangs or articulation
to break up large wall surfaces

4.5.1.2 - Pedestrian Scale Building Design

4.5.1.3 Blank walls, oversized façades, or elements that overwhelm pedestrians are prohibited.
Visual examples are encouraged to accompany design submittals.
4.5.1.4 Roofs will have at least one of the following features around the entire building:

4.5.2

•

Stepped parapets to conceal flat roofs;

•

Overhanging eaves; and/or

•

Pitched roofs

Buildings should incorporate detailing and massing strategies that contribute
to visual interest, compatibility with surroundings, and long-term adaptability.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 29

4.5.2.1 Wall planes shall not extend more than 30 feet without an offset or articulation. For facades
longer than 100 feet, at least 20% of the total length must include recesses or projections.
These elements must be a minimum of 2 feet in depth or projection, and 3 feet in width.
4.5.2.2 Metal buildings, except for garages, shall only be permitted if street-facing façades are
enhanced for visual quality and compatibility. At least two (2) of the following materials or
treatments must be applied to 30% or more of the street-facing façade:
•

Wood or fiber cement siding;

•

Brick or stone veneer;

•

Stucco or EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish System);

•

Architectural metal panels with texture or color variation;

•

Decorative concrete or masonry block;

•

Integrated awnings, trellises, or other architectural features.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 30

5.0 Residential
Standards

Design

Guidelines

and

5.1 Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to establish clear, enforceable design standards for residential
development in Storey County. These standards are intended to preserve the
County’s scenic and historic character, promote sustainable land use practices including
xeriscaping, erosion control, and protection of wildlife corridors, and ensure that new
development is compatible with the surrounding built and natural environment.

5.2 Single-Family Subdivisions and Planned Unit Developments Site Design
The following design standards and guidelines are intended to promote the development of
neighborhoods which are cohesive, functional, and create a sense of community. Particular
emphasis should be placed on creating thoughtful transitions within and between
neighborhoods, including the use of compatible lot sizes, housing types, and site design
elements to provide an appropriate transition in scale between existing development and
new neighborhoods. Where new residential areas adjoin established neighborhoods,
development should be designed to serve as a buffer or stepping stone between differing
densities and development patterns, with larger lots generally transitioning to smaller lots in
a gradual and compatible manner. It is essential that planning and design consider the
context and future development beyond the site boundaries.
5.2.1

Subdivision and PUD design should promote orderly development of lots that
connect onsite and offsite uses, contain a mix of types of residences and lot
sizes, and integrate open spaces. (Figure 9)

5.2.1.1 Projects creating parcels of less than one-half acre shall not include flag lots unless the
existing conditions provide no other feasible alternative. (Figure 9)
5.2.1.2 Avoid double frontage lots , except in the Comstock Historic District (CHD) or for subdivision
edges abutting arterial/collector roads. (Figure 9)
5.2.1.3 Where entrances are provided on both frontages along a local or collector public street that
is not an arterial, double frontage lots are appropriate. (Figure 9)
5.2.1.4 All lots for detached dwellings shall have access from and frontage along a public street or
private street maintained by an association of homeowners. Multifamily lots must have
access from and frontage along a public street, private street, or a drive aisle. (Figure 9)
5.2.1.5 Common open space areas shall include or connect to wildlife migration corridors where
practicable.
5.2.1.6 Lots will be sized in accordance with the minimum lot size and lot dimension requirements
detailed in SCC Title 17 based on the zoning designation of the parcels.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 31

5.2.1.7 Where a PUD abuts single-family residential or lower-density zoning, a transition in scale
and intensity shall be provided as follows (Figure 9):

5.2.2

•

An open space at least 50 feet in width abutting the lower density zoning; or,

•

Lots along the perimeter of the PUD abutting lower density zoning shall have
minimum lots sizes and setbacks no less than 75% of the minimum requirement in
the lower density zone.

•

The identified transition area shall be nuisance-free and maintained in perpetuity.

Open space should be proportionally provided across development phases or
legally reserved to ensure long-term availability and compliance.

5.2.2.1 Where open space is not phased proportionally, the developer shall execute a reservation
(easement or covenant) allowing the County to reserve designated areas as open space if
the development is not completed.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 32

Figure 9: Subdivision and PUD Site Design

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 33

5.3 Circulation and Parking
5.3.1

PUDs should incorporate pedestrian-friendly infrastructure to ensure
compatibility with adjacent residential areas, provide accessible public
amenities, and promote connectivity and safe circulation for all users. (Figure
10)

5.3.1.1 Pedestrian connections shall provide direct and convenient access between adjacent
neighborhoods to support walkability. Pedestrian connections should be provided unless
physical constraints or the circulation patterns of existing neighborhoods prevent connection.
In the event the development abuts vacant land, the proposed street layout should
accommodate future connections unless topography or physical constraints prevent future
connection. (Figure 10)
5.3.1.2 All sidewalks, streets, and parking lots shall conform to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
regulations and standards and other county codes. Sidewalks are required on both sides of
all new streets. Sidewalks along arterial routes must be designed in accordance with the
Storey County Standard Details for Public Works Construction. (Figure 10)
5.3.1.3 Except in areas lacking postal service, postal service cluster boxes shall be incorporated into
the project design, sited on paved areas with direct sidewalk and street access, and meet
USPS standards.
5.3.1.4 Pedestrian systems within PUDs shall connect residential areas to nearby destinations and
meet the following standards:
•

A minimum sidewalk width of 6 feet.

•

Include pedestrian-scale lighting to enhance visibility and safety;

•

Comply with ADA standards;

•

Direct and continuous connections to adjacent properties and public rights-of-way,
avoiding dead-ends unless steep slopes exceeding 10% or existing offsite
development prohibit a connection.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 34

5.3.1.5 A circulation plan may be requested for large PUD applications (more than 50 lots), showing
pedestrian and bicycle route hierarchy and connectivity. The plan must address the following
elements:
•

Street network integration

•

Pedestrian and bicycle connectivity

•

Open space and landscape continuity

5.3.1.6 Local streets shall connect to adjacent developments, with spacing and alignment
coordinated with collector/arterial street intersections to support a cohesive transportation
network. All proposed street connections shall evaluate existing conditions to demonstrate
no negative effect on the surrounding community and the existing transportation
network.(Figure 10)
5.3.1.7 For new subdivisions or PUDs, through traffic shall be directed to collector and arterial
streets to preserve neighborhood livability and safety. (Figure 10)
5.3.1.8 Developments shall include a coordinated system of wayfinding signage at key decision
points (e.g., neighborhood entries, trailheads, and public facilities). Signage should be clear,
visible, and designed to complement the character of the development.
5.3.1.9 Street design and classification shall be consistent with the identified Standard Specifications
for Public Works Construction.
5.3.1.10 Collector and arterial streets within PUDs shall be located along the perimeter of the
development or aligned with existing collector and arterial routes to minimize traffic impacts
on internal neighborhood streets. (Figure 10)
5.3.1.11 Local streets providing direct connection between two collector or arterial streets shall
incorporate traffic calming measures into the street design as recommended by an engineer
and accepted by the County Engineer. Acceptable traffic calming measures may include, but
are not limited to:
•

Curb extensions (bulb-outs)

•

Speed humps or cushions

•

Raised crosswalks or intersections

•

Chicanes or serpentine alignments

•

Mini roundabouts

•

Narrowed travel lanes

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 35

5.3.1.12 Subdivisions and PUDs must provide adequate emergency access and meet all emergency
services access and other requirements as outlined in SCC 16.10.040.
5.3.1.13 Where new multi-use paths are proposed, they will provide connections to nearby community
spaces such as parks, schools, and recreational trails .
5.3.2

Access points must be designed to balance traffic flow, safety, and connectivity
while minimizing curb cuts. (Figure 10)

5.3.2.1 Where feasible, adjacent multifamily dwellings shall provide shared driveways or internal
circulation connections to reduce the number of curb cuts and improve traffic safety.
Residential plans shall document driveway locations/spacing; shared access agreements;
and rear alleys, where appropriate, to support outward‑facing lots and reduce front‑ facing
garages. (Figure 10)

5.3.2.2 Single-family driveways shall be a
minimum of 20 feet in length to
prevent
sidewalk
obstruction.
Reduced lengths may be allowed
for street-facing garages if it can be
demonstrated that vehicles will not
encroach into the travel lane. (Figure
10)

5.3.2.2 – Driveway Length

5.3.2.3 Driveway approaches shall be visually distinguished using pavers, stamped concrete, or
other similar treatments. Paved driveways shall be constructed in accordance with Storey
County standard requirements and shall not occupy a majority of a site’s frontage. (Figure
10)
5.3.3

Parking for multifamily developments should be designed to ensure adequate
access for all multifamily units, reduce the visual impacts of the parking lot on
adjacent uses, and minimize pedestrian conflicts. (Figure 10)

5.3.3.1 No dwelling unit shall be more than 200 feet walking distance from the nearest parking space,
unless justified by site constraints.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 36

Figure 10: Circulation and Parking

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 37

5.4 Single-Family Dwelling and Accessory Building Design Standards
5.4.1

Home design should incorporate diverse architectural styles, detailing, and
color treatments to avoid repetition, preserve privacy, and enhance visual
quality.

5.4.1.1 Unless exclusively custom homes are proposed, subdivisions must include:
•

A minimum of three house model plans and three elevations per model for singlefamily dwellings

•

A minimum of two model plans and two elevations per model for multifamily
complexes

•

Identical elevations must not be repeated on adjacent lots on the same side of the
street or immediately across the street. A mix of one-story and two-story homes,
porches, bays, and balconies is encouraged.

5.4.1.2 Windows, doors, and garage doors (except
recessed garage doors) on the front
elevation shall have raised trim.
5.4.1.3 Units located along the perimeter of the
development shall include window and door
fenestration on all sides, except where side
elevations are less than 20 feet from
another residential structure.
5.4.1.4 Window trim and door trim shall differ in
color from the door or primary building to
create contrast and avoid monochromatic
structures.
5.4.1.5 A minimum of one principal window
treatment is required on every elevation
facing a street or required open space.
Treatments
may
include
pop-outs,
decorative wrought iron, wood trim, shutters,
plant shelves, or other embellishments.

5.4.1 - Single Family Building Design

5.4.1.6 Second-story windows, doors, and balconies must be designed to protect the privacy of
adjacent properties by not being located on the same sides of the building or by being offset,
rather than directly across from each other.
5.4.1.7 Acceptable primary building materials include stucco, brick, wood, durable composite lap or
bat-and-board siding, stone, and tinted/textured masonry units. Smooth-faced concrete

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 38

block, panel pressboard, and fabricated metal are discouraged as primary cladding but may
be used as accents.
5.4.1.8 Accessory buildings will be located in the rear or side-yards and designed so that they are
not obtrusive to the adjacent properties.
5.4.2

At least three of the following design features will be provided for each dwelling
within a proposed PUD:
•

Enhanced corners (pop-outs, embellishments, etc.);

•

One or more low roofs (one story roofs);

•

Second story stacked at greater setback than first floor to facilitate first floor
roof features, especially when located immediately above the garage;

•

Roof overhangs;

•

Porch or courtyard on the front elevation (pony walls and/or decorative
wrought iron) may be used for courtyard enclosures;

•

Enhanced window design on front-facing elevations and upper-story windows
facing a street or required open space;

•

Deck, patio, or balconies.

5.5 Multifamily Building Design and Layout
5.5.1

Multifamily buildings should be arranged to create open space and visual
connections between structures, enhance privacy, and support pedestrianfriendly design.

5.5.1.1 Where multifamily fronts a street,
provide a landscaped yard of at least 10’
between the building and ROW.
5.5.1.2 Setbacks and orientation must be
alternated to avoid monotonous
frontages.
5.5.1.3 Buildings shall be sited with
consideration for sun/wind exposure and
locate open spaces and pedestrian
walkways on south or west sides when
practical to maximize winter sun.
5.5.2

5.5.1.1 - Multifamily Street Frontage

Multifamily buildings adjacent to single-family zones incorporate transitional
design elements to reduce visual and privacy impacts and maintain
neighborhood compatibility.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 39

5.5.2.1 Multifamily lots located along the perimeter of the development shall have a minimum lot size
equal to at least 150 percent of the minimum single-family lot size required in the adjacent
development.
5.5.2.2 Second-story windows, doors, and balconies must be designed to protect neighbor privacy
by incorporating the following strategies:

5.5.3

•

Locate window, doors, and balconies such that direct views into neighboring
residential yards, patios, or windows is minimized.

•

Frosted, etched, or opaque glass shall be used in windows that face directly into
neighboring private outdoor or indoor spaces.

•

Where second story balconies are proposed, they shall be setback 10 feet from the
shared property line.

Buildings must incorporate roof and wall articulation, varied massing, and
detailed façades to enhance architectural character and avoid visual monotony.

5.5.3.1 The height of the building shall be
varied so that distinctive rooflines are
created or give an appearance of
height variation.
5.5.3.2 The planes of exterior walls will be
varied in depth and/or direction.
Building walls greater than 30 feet in
length will incorporate one or more
recesses, a minimum depth of 2 feet,
or projections a minimum of 2 feet.
Balconies and porches may be utilized
to meet this requirement.
5.5.4

Private outdoor spaces should be
screened
for
privacy
and
constructed with materials that
complement the building.

5.5.4.1 Balconies or patios shall be provided
with safety railings in accordance with
adopted IBC.
5.5.3 - Multifamily Roof and Wall Articulation

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 40

5.5.5

Stairways and accessory structures should reflect the architectural style of the
primary buildings.

5.5.5.1 Stairways shall provide durable and aesthetic railings and steps, compatible with the
architectural design of the building.

5.6 Landscaping, Open Space, & Amenities
5.6.1

Multifamily complexes include usable community amenities for recreation and
social interaction, scaled to the number of units and integrated into the site
through pedestrian connections.

5.6.1.1 Multifamily complexes with 6-9 units shall incorporate at least 2 of the following recreational
facilities. Developments with 10-99 units will incorporate at least 4 of the following
recreational facilities. Developments with 100 or more units will incorporate 6 of the following
recreational facilities:
•

On-site or in-unit laundry facilities appropriate to the number of units with in-unit
facilities being preferrable;

•

Fully landscaped courtyard or picnic area with seating, overhead shelter, tables, and
barbecue/grille;

•

Tennis/Pickleball court;

•

Volleyball court;

•

Basketball court;

•

Workout gym / exercise facilities and equipment;

•

Community multi-purpose room;

•

Walking trails (minimum one-quarter mile in length);

•

Parks (including dog parks) or playgrounds with jungle-gym, swing set, and other
children’s play structures;

•

Similar amenities as approved by the director of planning.

The facilities listed above should be located within 500 feet from any dwelling unit in the
complex, and connected to a residential building in the complex by sidewalks or walking
trails. The exception includes the walking trail which may extend beyond this distance, but
will commence within this distance.
5.6.1.2 Open space areas shall include pedestrian amenities such as benches, picnic tables, trash
receptacles, gazebos, etc.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 41

5.6.1.3 Open space is usable, landscaped, and connected through a comprehensive pedestrian
network that enhances site circulation and aesthetics. Provide at least 100 square feet of
open space per dwelling unit designed for recreation. Existing native vegetation may be
integrated with trails/amenities to satisfy improved recreation area requirements.
5.6.1.4 At least 50% of the required open space will consist of connected, contiguous areas that are
greater than or equal to 200 square feet with widths no smaller than 10 feet.
5.6.1.5 At least 25% of required open space must have slopes less than or equal to 15%. Of the
area with slopes less than or equal to 15%, at least 50% must be landscaped (trees, shrubs,
turf/xeriscape) with appropriate irrigation systems, consistent with Section 3.6.

Storey County Design Guidelines and Standards–Second Draft | September 2026

Page 42