The subject property is on the south side of Wedekind Road and bounded on the west and south by the Sparks city limits. (Refer to Exhibit A – Vicinity Map). The request covers 2 parcels, 3.24 acres and 0.23 acres in size respectively, totaling 3.47 acres. According to the Washoe County Assessor’s records, there are three residential units constructed in 1940 and 1951 on the two properties.

The applicant initially requested annexation and a zone change for the subject properties in August 2016. At the time the applications were submitted, the City lacked the capacity to provide sanitary sewer service to the site.  During this time period the City was also in the process of adopting its new Comprehensive Plan, which includes a policy that the City will not annex properties until the City can provide services. The City Council certified the new Comprehensive Plan on October 24, 2016.

The applicant agreed to postpone review of the annexation and zone change applications until the City knew whether sanitary sewer service could be provided to the subject properties. Accordingly, the applications were not processed until the 2017/2018 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) was approved by the City Council on May 22, 2017. The CIP allocates funding to increase sanitary sewer capacity in the vicinity of the subject properties.

The Planning Commission reviewed the annexation request on June 15, 2017 and recommended that the City Council deny the annexation for reasons discussed in the “Analysis” Section of this staff report. 

The applicant is requesting voluntary annexation of this site into the City of Sparks in order to redevelop the property. The site, referred to as Wildcreek Meadows, consists of two parcels totaling 3.47 acres. The existing homes on the site are served by well and septic systems. Annexation would permit these parcels to receive municipal services. (Refer to Exhibit B – Annexation Map)

If annexed, Washoe County zoning would convert to the City’s SF15 (Single Family Residential – maximum of 2.9 dwelling units per acre) zoning. Per a separate application, the applicant is requesting to change the zoning from SF15 to SF6 (Single Family Residential – maximum of 7.26 dwelling units per acre). 

Annexation of the subject parcels represents a logical extension of the city limits because the parcels are located within the McCarran Boulevard ring and are contiguous to the current city limits on the west and south sides of the site. With the City Council’s approval of a contract to design the sewer capacity improvements discussed above, the City will have the capacity to provide sanitary sewer service to the subject site.

However, the Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) submitted by the applicant (attached as Exhibits C and D and discussed in Finding “G” below) projects, for the single-family development scenario, a negative fiscal impact for the City of $330,064 over the 20-year analysis period. Moreover, City staff are concerned that the projected deficit could prove to be substantially more. Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 268.663(3) pertaining to annexations requires that when, as contemplated, the parcels proposed for annexation are subdivided and provided primary access from Wedekind Road, the City will need to take responsibility for the full segment of Wedekind Road from El Rancho Drive to Sullivan Lane. If that occurs, that segment of Wedekind Road will need to be upgraded to City standards (including the provision of curb, gutter and sidewalks). As a result, the net negative impact to the City could be 3-4 times higher than the -$330,064 deficit projected in the applicant’s FIA. For this reason, as currently proposed annexation of these properties appears to be premature because it would be substantially fiscally negative for the City.

ANNEXATION FINDINGS:

Finding A1. The request conforms to the requirements of NRS 268.

Per Nevada Revised Statues (NRS), cities within counties whose population level is at 100,00 or more, but less than 700,000 (which includes Washoe County) and that has adopted a comprehensive regional plan pursuant to NRS 278.026-278.029, inclusive, also needs to adopt an annexation program per NRS 268.625. The City’s Annexation Program expired December 31, 2015.

However, NRS 268.670 allows for the governing body (in this case the Sparks City Council) of a municipality to consider annexations when the property is contiguous to the city limits and is requested by 100 percent of the property owners. Because these properties are contiguous to the Sparks city limits and annexation is being requested by the property owner (Lisha Liu), the annexation can be considered even though the Sparks Annexation Program has expired.

Finding A2.  The request conforms to the findings established for annexation applications pursuant to the Sparks Municipal Code Chapter 20.05.05.

Chapter 20.05.05 of the Sparks Municipal Code requires annexations to be reviewed subject to the following:

1. Location of the property to be considered for annexation:

The parcels being considered for annexation are located on the south side of Wedekind Road. The site is contiguous to the Sparks’ city limits on the west and south and is within the City of Sparks’ Sphere of Influence.

2. The logical extension of City limits:

The subject parcels are contiguous to the Sparks city limits on two sides. There are existing city utility services in close proximity to the property. If the parcels are subdivided into single family lots and Wedekind Road serves as the primary access to the site, annexation will likely require the City to assume maintenance responsibility for Wedekind Road between El Rancho Drive and Sullivan Lane, which will result in new costs for the City.

3. The need for expansion to accommodate planned regional growth:

The property is within the City of Sparks’ Sphere of Influence. Based on a study conducted by Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency, there is a housing shortage in the region. Redevelopment of the subject properties will modestly increase the region’s supply of single family housing. However, there are currently 4,248 tentative map lots approved and over 1,700 lots in final maps being processed by the City.

4. The location of existing and planned water and sewer service:

The subject site is bordered on two sides by city neighborhoods of single family homes served by water and sanitary sewer. This places water and sanitary sewer services in close proximity to the subject parcels. Water service would be provided by the Truckee Meadows Water Authority while sanitary sewer would be provided by the City of Sparks. Sanitary sewer service cannot be provided to the subject site until the interceptor in Tyler Way is improved by the City. This project is included in the City’s 2017/2018 Capital Improvement Plan and, on August 14, 2017, the City Council approved a design contract for the sewer project. The developer will be responsible for paying the costs for the extension of a sewer line from the Tyler Way interceptor to the property.

5. Community goals that would be met by the proposed annexation:

The Comprehensive Plan goals/policies that would be met by the proposed annexation are:

Goal MG6: Promote compact development to reduce the per capita cost of providing infrastructure, public facilities and public services.

The subject properties are adjacent to an older part of Sparks with existing 6,000 square foot single family lots served by City services. This site is within the McCarran Boulevard loop and can also be served by city services. However, staff has not fully determined the fiscal impact of annexing these properties on the City’s budget. In particular, if the parcels are subdivided into single family lots and Wedekind Road serves as the primary access, annexation of these properties will likely require the City to take responsibility for maintaining Wedekind Road between El Rancho Drive and Sullivan Lane, the fiscal impact of which is addressed in Finding G below.

Policy MG7: When reviewing annexation requests, the City will consider whether the proposed annexation: a) is included in the City’s Seven Year Annexation Program; b) is needed for the City’s growth within seven years; c) represents a logical extension of the city limits; d) allows for efficient and cost effective provision of public services and capital facilities; and e) would be fiscally positive for a period of at least 20 years. When reviewing land use entitlements (e.g. master plan amendments, zone changes, tentative maps, conditional use permits) for land annexed within the previous 10-year period, the City may require an updated fiscal analysis if the proposed development materially varies from the development contemplated in the fiscal analysis prepared for the annexation.

Items a – d are discussed above. Item e is addressed in paragraph G below. 

Policy CF1: When reviewing new development, the City will not approve an application unless the City services can be provided at acceptable service levels.

Currently, fire service to this unincorporated area is provided by the City of Reno. Upon annexation, fire and emergency response would be from City of Sparks Fire Station 1; this site is estimated to be within a 6-minute response time from that station.

A sanitary sewer project to increase capacity in the vicinity of this site was included in the City’s 2017/18 Capital Improvements Plan. With the inclusion of the planned interceptor improvements in the City’s CIP, the annexation request can comply with this policy. However, development of this property cannot move forward until the sanitary sewer interceptor work on Tyler Way is completed.

6. The efficient and cost effective provision of service areas and capital facilities:

The subject property would be served by the Tyler Way sanitary sewer interceptor. This facility is currently over capacity. As discussed above, a project to increase capacity has been included in the City of Sparks FY 2017/18 Capital Improvements Plan and the City Council has approved a design contract for the Tyler Way interceptor improvements. Development of the subject site would need to be timed to assure the sanitary sewer capacity improvements are in place. Fire service would be from Fire Station Number 1.

7. Fiscal analysis regarding the proposed annexation:

The applicant provided a Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA; it is attached as Exhibits C and D) based on two scenarios: development of 30 single family units or of 69 multi-family units. City staff focused on the single-family scenario as the site’s Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning, both currently and as requested by the applicant, would not allow a multi-family development project to be developed on the site. The FIA estimates, for a 20-year period, City expenditures for services associated with this proposed annexation, including most substantially public safety and road maintenance costs. The FIA assumes that the City would assume responsibility, currently with Washoe County, for maintaining that section of Wedekind Road directly adjacent to the property. The FIA also projects the revenues the City would receive from this annexation, including those from taxes, licenses, permits, and gas and electric franchise fees.   

The FIA for the single-family development scenario projects a net fiscal deficit for the City of $330,064 over the 20-year analysis period.  While the FIA indicates that the City’s general fund would see a positive fiscal impact of $143,066, it also projects a net fiscal deficit of $473,130 for the City’s “Road Fund.”  Strictly speaking, however, the franchise fees that are allocated for road maintenance may be otherwise expended by the City, as demonstrated by the City Council’s decision earlier this year to allocate such funds for repairs to the field turf at Golden Eagle Regional Park.

City staff are concerned that the projected deficit may prove to be substantially greater. Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 268.663(3) pertaining to annexations requires that when, as contemplated, the parcels proposed for annexation are subdivided and provided primary access from Wedekind Road, the City will need to take responsibility for the full segment of Wedekind Road from El Rancho Drive to Sullivan Lane. If that occurs, that segment will need to be upgraded to City standards (including the provision of curb, gutter and sidewalks). As a result, the net negative impact to the City could be 3-4 times higher than the -$330,064 deficit projected in the applicant’s FIA. For this reason, as currently proposed annexation of these parcels appears to be premature because it would be substantially fiscally negative for the City.

8. Whether Washoe County has adopted a Community Management Plan for the proposed annexation area;

After reviewing the application, Washoe County staff commented that the County does not have any issue with the annexation of these properties since they are in the Sparks Sphere of Influence. However, Washoe County staff noted that annexation would leave an island of Washoe County on the south side of Wedekind. Staff disagrees with this comment since there are still parcels in Washoe County to the north, making the remnant parcel a peninsula. 

1. Whether the annexation creates any islands:

There are parcels still within the jurisdiction of Washoe County on the north side of Wedekind Road. The annexation will not create an island though there will be a remnant parcel left on the south side of Wedekind Road. This request is a voluntary annexation of parcels that are contiguous to city limits. The timing and the need to annex Wedekind Road has not been determined. With the annexation of Wedekind Road, the remaining parcel to the east of the subject parcels would become an island.

10. Any other factors concerning the proposed annexation deemed appropriate for consideration by the City Council:

Finding A3. The property requested to be annexed conforms to the Comprehensive Plan as it is within the City’s Sphere of Influence and Seven Year Annexation Program.

The City of Sparks initially exerted planning jurisdiction by including this area in its Sphere of Influence in 2002. As discussed in Finding A1, the Annexation Program has expired.

Finding A4.       Public notice was given and a public hearing held per the requirements of the Sparks Municipal Code.

Public notice was given per the requirements of the Sparks Municipal Code and Nevada Revised Statutes. The Planning Commission and City Council meetings function as the public hearings for this item. This annexation request was noticed, at a minimum, to all property owners within 750 feet of the subject properties. The public notice was published in the Reno Gazette Journal on June 1, 2017. The City mailed notices to 130 property owners. 

1. The City Council could remand the annexation petition back to Planning Commission with direction.
2. The City Council could approve the annexation petition with findings that support the approval. 

I move to deny Bill No. 2724, the voluntary annexation petition for PCN16042, based on consideration of Findings A1 through A4, and the facts concerning these findings as set forth in the staff report.