Carson City Planning Commission again denies development of Andersen Ranch West: 'not quite there yet'

After nearly four hours of discussion, Carson City Planning Commissioners Wednesday once again voted to deny the Andersen Ranch west development despite the developer’s attempt at rectifying their plan from the previous meeting.

The property, located west of Ormsby Boulevard and north of Kings Canyon Road was previously denied in September citing housing density, neighborhood character, traffic, flooding, and other issues.

Several said at the time that open space was not properly incorporated, including the Ash Canyon Creek.

One connection among the public is the fact that the development is still working under 17.10, which was unanimously repealed by the Board of Supervisors. However, since the development was already working within the code, they are “grandfathered in.”

Several public commenters said they would like to see the development utilize current code.

However, even under 17.10, the development provides significantly more common open space than what is dictated by 17.10.

In its current form, the proposed development will only construct homes on the northern 30 acre portion of the 80 acre project, leaving the southern 50 acres empty, with the exception of the 9 acre parcel containing the historic Andersen Ranch buildings.

While the northern portion of the project is zoned for single-family 1 acre, the developer is proposing to transfer the 12,000 zoning from the untouched southern portion to the northern portion which, while allowed under 17.10, is another point of contention among the public.

Public commenters also did not have faith in developers after the numerous issues residents reported during the development of Andersen Ranch East. First, developers allowed the property to become a nuisance with thousands of tumbleweeds inundating neighboring homes, and then, when the lot was bulldozed, the tumbleweeds were replaced by high speed dust that plagued the area.

“As commissioners know there were significant issues with dust with the construction of that site, the same regulations that control that site will be in control of this site as well,” Stephen Pottéy, senior project manager of engineering said.

Control involves spraying the site with water, or, if water is not enough, using a palliative (substances applied to ground for dust control using sprayers). However, neighbors of the Andersen Ranch East project also complained that, when the site was finally sprayed down to control dust using a palliative, the tanks utilized for the project were over-spraying into neighbor’s properties.

“If we get to that point, and it’s necessary, we’ll be reminding the developer to be cautious and aren’t applying that in a way that will cause it to overspray into other areas that are not being treated.”

Mark Forsberg, representing the Andersen family, said the ranch has been owned since the 1870s, but it has become more and more difficult over the years to operate a ranch in city limits.

At this time, there are no plans to develop the remainder 50-acre parcel that contains the 9.46 acre parcel containing the historic ranch house which will be turned into private open space.

“Historically speaking, when this application came before you in September, it made the requirements of the code then,” Forsberg said. “It had the approval of the fire department, of the school district; all the steps that were necessary to be taken have been taken.”

The proposal also includes a new regional trail connecting the Mountain Street Trailhead to Quill Ranch.

Following hours of discussion and public comment, commissioners ultimately voted against the new plan, stating that while improvements were made, the proposal “just wasn’t there yet.”

Commissioner Richard Perry voted against due to the fact that, in his mind, the developer did not do enough to highlight the Ash Canyon Creek.

Though the developer did include a trail that goes beside the creek following Commissioner’s last denial, Perry said that it was too narrow, and “could have been a lot nicer.”

Commissioner Charles Borders Jr. agreed, and said that while the plans are “getting there, they’re not there yet.”

Commissioner Sena Loyd said that number six was not met.

“I’m having a hard time applying density to the north lot with no plan for the south lot,” Loyd said.

Commissioner Ellen Dechristopher said this was a starting point as opposed to the end of the development.

Commissioner Vern Krahn said that while the developer did a good job of making changes, he could not give his yes to it.

Commissioner Nathaniel Killgore said he echoed other commissioners, and he did not believe it was finished.

Commissioner Teri Preston said this piece of property is a hallmark, and she is “heartbroken” about Andersen Ranch East.

Commissioners voted to deny unanimously based on the inability to find Finding 6 which requires “conformity with the zoning ordinance and land use element of the City’s Master Plan.”