Friday, September 13, 2024
RENO — An ordinance to solidify Reno’s one-home-per-acre rule is still in limbo after last week’s city council meeting.
Reno City Council held a public hearing regarding an ordinance that would “(provide) for one unit per acre for (Single Family Residential-1) zoning districts.” Passing the rule is expected to close loopholes and contradictions within the city’s ordinances.
This topic has been discussed by the council before in the past few years and seems to die in the municipal process instead of being enacted. Recently, the council sent the draft ordinance to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a public hearing and a vote. However, P&Z did not discuss the proposed rule; Reno P&Z Chairperson Justin Williams said it would be against the law to discuss the ordinance because it doesn’t adhere to the city’s comprehensive plan. Williams cited Texas Local Government Code Section 211.004 that states, “Zoning regulations must be adopted in accordance with a comprehensive plan.”
Reno’s zoning ordinance that is detailed in the comprehensive plan on its website allows for no more than four units per acre in Single Family Residential-1 districts. Meanwhile, Single Family Residential District-Estate’s density is no more than one home per acre, and Single Family Residential District-2 permits four to six units per acre. In practice, lots in Reno have to be one acre or more to account for septic systems since the city doesn’t have a public sewer system. If a developer wanted to bring in smaller housing lots, they would have to make a plan to install sewer lines.
At the Aug. 19 meeting, the council heard from residents on both sides of the issue — those who want the housing density that one-home-per-acre provides and those who think the city should be capitalizing on higher density subdivisions.
The council discussed this topic further in closed session. When they came back into the public meeting, the council members took no action on the proposed ordinance.
“The city council needs to amend the city comprehensive plan,” Mayor Hector Bas Jr. said after coming back from executive session. “The comprehensive plan must be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission before being considered by the city council.”
The people who spoke in favor of the one-home-per-acre rule justified their opinion based on the quality of life they have in Reno — wanting to maintain a more rural atmosphere, living at a slower pace and having room to spread out and raise livestock.
“I like being able to sit out at night and watch the owls fly over,” resident Meredith Hull said during the meeting. “I didn't get to do that in Fort Worth. … Keep in mind, those of us that are out here are out here by choice. We are here because we wanted to be here.”
Those who favored the proposed ordinance also said increasing density would put more pressure on infrastructure in the city, like the school, the roads, the police and fire departments and the water system.
“We can't keep up with what we got,” resident Ted Lyon said during the meeting. “We're on (water) restrictions now in proof. Streets are already behind on street maintenance. That's without these new developments, which is going to increase the traffic flow if we go to quarter and eighth acre lots.”
On the opposing side, resident Jesse LaForest said he likes bigger lots, but he doesn’t think they are feasible considering the city’s budget and water infrastructure issues. He also said bigger lots mean more water used for irrigation.
“There's going to have to be some hard decisions that need to be made,” LaForest said during the meeting. “(There) has to be planning. We can't stick our head in the ground and say, ‘Oh, the infrastructure. It'll get better by one acre lots.’ It's not going to get better; it's going to be worse.”
Resident Kim White echoed LaForest’s statements by saying that while larger lots may be more popular, they are unfeasible and unrealistic.
“Your answer is not disincorporation. Your answer is not one acre lots,” White said during the meeting. “Your answer is controlled and managed growth.”
