2013 2:00:00 PM

Monday, February 11, 2013 2:00 PM
745 Fourth St, Sparks, NV 89431

General Business: 6.2

Title: Consideration and Possible Approval of a Request for Variance to Sparks Municipal Code, Title 15 (Sections 15.11.0310 – 15.11.0350, Floodways) by The Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) for Development within the Regulatory Flood Way- SouthEast Connector Phase 1.

Petitioner/Presenter: The Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC)/John A. Martini, P.E., Assistant Community Services Director

Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council Approve the Request for the Variance

Financial Impact: None.

Business Impact (Per NRS 237):
A Business Impact Statement is not required because this is not a rule.

Agenda Item Brief: The Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) is requesting a variance to Sparks Municipal Code, Title 15 (Sections 15.11.0310 – 15.11.0350, Floodways) to allow for construction of Phase 1 of the SouthEast Connector Roadway. The project site is completely within the FEMA regulatory floodway and, as such, any development activity requires variance to SMC Title 15. The Engineering Division of the Community Services Department has reviewed the project plan and the associated technical documents in support of the project and is of the opinion that the development activity will have no adverse impact to the FEMA regulatory floodway. Staff supports the request for the variance.

Background: The Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) is proposing to construct Phase 1 of the SouthEast Connector roadway. The proposed alignment for the Phase 1 of the South East Connector is presented in Figure 1 and will be constructed from the terminus of Sparks Boulevard (at Greg Street) to approximately 800 feet south of Clean Water Way. As shown in Figure 2, the alignment is located within the regulatory flood way as delineated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panels 3063 and 3064 of 3475, effective March 16, 2009. Development within a regulatory flood way is prohibited unless the City of Sparks City Council grants a variance in accordance to the standards set forth in Sections 15.11.0310 through 15.11.0350 of the Sparks Municipal Code. Additionally, the Council must consider if the proposed variance is consistent with the procedures and findings of fact as set forth in Section 20.16.04 of the Code. The Community Services Department has met with the applicant on several occasions to review the proposed alignment and to provide technical guidance regarding the ability for staff to support a proposed variance. The applicant retained Stantec Consulting Services to provide hydrologic and hydraulic analyses and to provide modeling of the effects of the proposed development with respect to the standards, provisions, and findings of fact required for the variance. The results of the modeling and analyses have been reviewed by the Engineering Division of the Community Services Department. Staff is in general agreement with the findings of the analyses and concurs that a variance can be supported for the project. A summary of the proposed elements of the project and the effects each will have on the floodway are included under the analysis portion of this report.

Analysis: As presented in Figure 3, construction of the Phase 1 of the SouthEast Connector will include approximately one mile of elevated major arterial roadway, a bridge that extends over the Truckee River and south over the flood pool approximately 2,000-feet, a bridge over Clean Water Way, three equalization culverts, twelve bioswales, storm drain improvements, two volumetric mitigation basins and culverts under Clean Water Way. In order for the Sparks City Council to approve this variance request, the Council must consider one fundamental issue, eleven standards, and four findings of fact. The following is a consideration of these issues and a response to each: Fundamental issue to consider: The potential of changing the floodway in a manner that would result in increased flood water depth for adjacent properties. Response: As discussed above, staff has reviewed the proposed site plan and the technical documents in support of the project. Based on the findings of the technical documents, staff is of the opinion that the proposed development will not change the floodway and result in increased flood water depth for the adjacent properties as evidenced by the certification of “no rise” determination provide by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (attached). The municipal code related issues are presented in Sections 15.11.034 of the SMC. Section 15.11.034 outlines eleven (11) standards that must be considered by the Council: 1. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands and injuring others. Response: Stored materials and equipment will be removed from the floodway as part of the emergency response plan submitted by the applicant. 2. The danger of life and property due to flooding or erosion damage. Response: The roadway will be elevated above the 117-year water surface elevation, which exceeds the 100-year water surface elevation, to maintain one 12-foot dry lane in each direction. The site is located in a backwater area with low velocities therefore there is little danger to life or the property. Once the overall project is completed, the elevated roadway will provide emergency access for areas in the flood pool along the length of the proposed roadway. 3. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the existing individual owner and future owners of the property. Response: The roadway will be elevated above the 117-year water surface elevation to maintain one 12-foot dry lane in each direction. The site is located in a backwater area with low velocities therefore the roadway is not highly susceptible to flood damage. 4. The importance of the serviced provided by the proposed facility to the community. Response: The SouthEast Connector is a regionally significant road identified in the Regional Transportation Plan that will provide a direct link between the City of Sparks and South Reno and Carson City. This link will provide a bypass of the highly congested bottleneck at I-80 and US395, in our regional transportation network. The link will reduce vehicle miles traveled, thereby improving air quality and the quality of life in the Truckee Meadows. The management of the air quality in the city of Sparks and the Truckee Meadows not only helps ensure the health of local residents, but helps to ensure the area remains attractive for further economic development and destination tourism. 5. The necessity to the facility of a water front location, where applicable. Response: Not applicable. 6. The availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to flooding or erosion damage. Response: There are no other practicable alternative alignments for the SouthEast Connector. A significant portion of the analysis of the SouthEast Connector Project evaluated alternative alignments. All other alternative alignments impacted existing residences, requiring relocation of residents, a significant amount of grading of exiting topographic features and increased roadway lengths, thereby increasing the overall public cost of the project. The selected alignment impacts no residents and provides a more direct connection between East Sparks and South Reno. 7. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development. Response: The project is located in an industrially developed area of southeast Sparks. Development will span the Truckee River and extend into existing agricultural land that is also zoned for industrial uses. Future development of the project area is anticipated to be industrial unless the property owners process a zone change and master plan amendment. A new roadway constructed in an industrial area is compatible with the underlying zoning and with both existing and anticipated development. 8. The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program for that area. Response: The project is consistent with the action strategies, goals and objectives for Flood Hazards as contained within the Sparks Comprehensive Plan. 9. The safety of access to the property in time of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles. Response: Not applicable. 10. The expected height, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. Response: The height, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters will not change from the current conditions. The proposed road maintains one 12-foot driveable lane in each direction above the 117-year event. The velocities associated with the surrounding flood waters are expected to be low due to the backwater condition at the site. 11. The cost of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical and water system and streets and bridges. Response: This facility will require typical maintenance for the roadway and associated bioswales and culverts along with maintenance of the volumetric basins. The RTC is currently working on an agreement to provide a maintenance endowment to cover maintenance of the volumetric basins in perpetuity. There will be no sewer, gas, electrical or water systems requiring maintenance. B)Consideration of the variance is also required to be consistent with the procedures and findings of fact as set forth in Chapter 20.16.04 of the SMC. The City Council must make four findings of fact : 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that generally do not apply to other properties classified in the same zoning district. Response: Not applicable. This request for variance is not relative to zoning as the project is a public works project for construction of a 4 lane arterial roadway and as such no comparison to other properties of similar zoning can be made. 2. That strict interpretation and enforcement of the specified provisions would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties classified in the same zoning district. Response: Not applicable. The applicant is a public agency and does not enjoy privileges enjoyed by any private property owner classified in the same zoning district. 3. That the granting of the variance will not constitute or grant a special privilege inconsistent with limitations on other properties classified in the same zoning district. Response: Not applicable. The applicant is a public agency and does not enjoy privileges enjoyed by any private property owner classified in the same zoning district. 4. That the granting of the variance will not substantially impair the public health, safety or welfare or materially injure properties or improvements within the vicinity. Response: This finding of fact can be made based upon staff’s concurrence that the construction of Phase 1 of the SouthEast Connector will not adversely impact base flood elevations, the rate of sediment transport, or cause damage to adjacent properties due to erosion. As such, granting of the variance will not act to impair the public health, safety or materially injure properties or improvements within the vicinity.

Alternatives: The City Council may or may not approve the requested variance.

Recommended Motion: Move to approve the request for variance to Sparks Municipal Code, Title 15 (Sections 15.11.0310 – 15.11.0350, Floodways) to the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County for development of Phase 1 of the SouthEast Connector within the regulatory flood way.

Attached Files:

Attachments to SEC Title 15 Variance.pdf

Previous Item

Next Item

Return To Meeting