This report provides a legal and planning analysis of the proposed commercial development project, known as the Lakeridge Resort, submitted by The Duncan Group (operating as Duncan Golf Management, owned by the Duncan Family).1 The proposed development is situated at the existing Lakeridge Golf Course, located at 1218 Golf Club Drive, Reno, Nevada 89519, specifically identified as Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 042-011-28.3 Lakeridge Golf Course, designed by Robert Trent Jones Sr. and opened in 1969, is a well-regarded 18-hole course known for its scenic setting, challenging play, and a "tucked-away feel" despite its proximity to downtown Reno.5
The Duncan Group proposes a significant expansion onto a portion of the property previously used as a driving range.7 The project entails the addition of a 100-room hotel, villas, sports courts, a spa, restaurants, and other associated amenities. 1 The stated objectives of the development are to attract a broader clientele, including locals and out-of-town visitors, stimulate economic growth, and establish the Lakeridge property as a prominent destination in the Reno area.1 The developers have characterized this as a long-term undertaking, potentially spanning seven to ten years.7
Crucially, the Lakeridge Golf Course property is located directly within or immediately adjacent to established residential neighborhoods. Surrounding properties include single-family homes and condominiums, such as those along Lakeridge Terrace West and East, with zoning designations including Single-Family Residential (SF5) and Multi-Family Residential (MF30).8 This proximity creates an inherent conflict between the proposed high-intensity commercial and resort activities – including hotel operations, potential late-night events, and associated traffic – and the existing quiet, residential character of the community. The introduction of what is effectively a new party space and hotel complex into this setting raises significant concerns regarding land use compatibility and potential negative externalities impacting residents' quality of life.
The purpose of this report is to provide a comprehensive analysis grounded in the City of Reno's adopted planning framework and municipal code. It aims to demonstrate that the required land use approvals for the Lakeridge Resort project, specifically Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) application LDC25-00061 and the anticipated Conditional Use Permits (CUPs), should be denied by the City of Reno. This analysis contends that the proposed project is inconsistent with the guiding principles and policies of the Reno Master Plan (ReImagine Reno), fails to satisfy the mandatory legal findings required for ZMA and CUP approval under the Reno Municipal Code (RMC) Title 18 (Annexation and Land Development Code), and would generate significant adverse impacts related to noise, light, traffic, and overall neighborhood character that are fundamentally incompatible with the surrounding residential community.
This analysis is based on publicly available information regarding the proposed project, including application details filed with the City of Reno 4, statements attributed to the developers 1, descriptions of the existing site 2, and relevant provisions of the Reno Master Plan and RMC Title 18 accessible through the provided research materials.11
It must be noted that several web links provided for direct access to the developer's project website, specific news articles, and potentially critical PDF documents containing the full text of the Master Plan chapters or Land Development Code sections were inaccessible at the time of research.13 Consequently, this report relies on the textual content available within the accessible research snippets, general principles of Nevada land use law (including NRS Chapter 278), standard planning practices, and the explicit requirements cited in the available code excerpts. Where direct citation to specific, inaccessible code or plan language is not possible, arguments are based on the available application details, stated purposes of code sections, common legal requirements for such approvals, and the information quoted in the accessible sources.
The proposed Lakeridge Resort expansion encompasses several distinct commercial and recreational components intended to transform the existing golf course into a multi-faceted destination. The core elements identified include 13:
The development is planned for the area previously occupied by the Lakeridge Golf Course driving range.7 The Duncan Group has stated that the existing 18-hole golf course layout, designed by Robert Trent Jones Sr., will not be altered by these additions.1
To proceed, the Lakeridge Resort project requires several significant land use entitlements and permits from the City of Reno, governed primarily by RMC Title 18\.
The foundational approval required is a Zone Map Amendment (ZMA). Application LDC25-00061 was submitted to the City of Reno on April 29, 2025, specifically for parcel 042-011-28, identified as the "Lakeridge Resort ZMA". 4 The purpose of this ZMA is to change the property's current zoning designation, Open Space (PGOS), to a new designation that permits the proposed hotel, event facilities, and other commercial/resort uses.
The proposal explicitly involves the creation of a "Specific Plan District" (SPD) for the site. 7 An SPD is a type of zoning overlay or district that allows for customized development standards tailored to a specific project or area. 18 While SPDs offer flexibility, their creation still necessitates a ZMA process, must be consistent with the overarching goals and policies of the Reno Master Plan, and are subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission and/or City Council. The very fact that the developer is pursuing an SPD, rather than utilizing an existing standard zoning district, strongly suggests that the proposed uses and development intensity are not contemplated or permitted under the current zoning or other standard commercial/mixed-use zones appropriate for this location.
Developers typically seek SPDs when their project concepts deviate significantly from established zoning norms, further highlighting the potential incompatibility of this proposal with the surrounding area's planned character. Furthermore, the ZMA application (LDC25-00061) appears to have been filed specifically to enable this particular project, rather than as part of a broader, comprehensive planning update for the area.4 This project-specific rezoning request raises concerns about "spot zoning"—changing the zoning of a small parcel in a way inconsistent with the surrounding area and the comprehensive plan, primarily for the benefit of the property owner rather than the public welfare.
Beyond the fundamental zoning change, several components of the proposed Lakeridge Resort will almost certainly require Conditional Use Permits (CUPs). RMC Title 18 employs the CUP process to review uses that, while potentially allowable in a particular zone, possess unique characteristics or potential impacts (e.g., scale, hours of operation, noise, traffic generation) requiring site-specific review and conditions to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties.
20 Uses commonly requiring CUPs, particularly when located near residential zones, include hotels, motels, large restaurants, bars, spas, and facilities hosting events or assemblies. 22 A project involving a 100-room hotel with associated amenities like restaurants, a spa, and potential event/banquet functions clearly falls into this category. 1 A recent example involved a CUP required for a project including 800 hotel rooms and an arena. 25
Therefore, it is anticipated that the Duncan Group will need to secure one or more CUPs for the hotel itself, any significant restaurant or bar operations (especially if seeking extended hours), the spa (depending on scale and services), and particularly for any dedicated event or banquet facilities capable of hosting weddings, conferences, or large parties. Each CUP application must be evaluated on its own merits against specific findings mandated by RMC 18.08.605(e), focusing heavily on compatibility with adjacent uses and mitigation of potential negative impacts.20 The developer's description of the project as a 7-to-10-year build-out 7 does not alter the requirement for the City to evaluate the CUP applications based on the impacts of the *fully realized* project. The potential for phased construction does not excuse the need to determine, at the outset, whether the ultimate development intensity and use are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and meet all required legal findings. Granting a CUP implies approval of the entire proposed scope, and the long-term nature of the project cannot justify approving a fundamentally incompatible use.
Depending on the specifics of the SPD and the final design, a Major Site Plan Review (MSPR) might also be necessary. MSPR involves a public hearing before the Planning Commission and is often required for larger, more complex projects or those with specific triggers, such as certain sign types or locations.22
Finally, the physical construction of the hotel, villas, spa, and other structures will require standard building permits from the City's Building & Safety division. 28 However, the issuance of building permits is contingent upon the prior approval of all necessary land use entitlements, including the ZMA and any required CUPs. RMC Section 14.03.040 explicitly prohibits the Building Official from issuing a building permit for any structure or use that does not comply with zoning regulations.30 RMC 14.03.060 further stipulates that building permits cannot be issued until all appeal periods for underlying land use decisions have expired.30
The City of Reno's official guiding document for land use and development is the ReImagine Reno Master Plan, adopted in December 2017 and subsequently updated.31 This plan establishes the City's vision for growth over a 20-year horizon and sets forth policies and strategies to achieve that vision. Key strategic priorities reflected in the plan and related City Council goals include fostering appropriate Economic and Community Development, ensuring Infrastructure and Environmental Sustainability, preserving Arts, Parks, and Historical Resources, and specifically, implementing the Master Plan itself through consistent land use decisions.31 RMC Title 18, the Land Development Code, explicitly serves to implement the Master Plan's policies.34 General purposes embedded within the code, reflecting Master Plan intent, include conserving and enhancing the character of established residential neighborhoods, encouraging quality development, and minimizing objectionable impacts such as noise, glare, and traffic, particularly where new development occurs adjacent to residential uses.34
The proposed Lakeridge Resort project fundamentally conflicts with the Master Plan's core principles regarding land use compatibility. The plan emphasizes the need for sensitive transitions between areas of differing intensity and character.36 Introducing a high-intensity commercial resort complex, featuring a 100-room hotel, potential event center functions, and associated 24/7 activity, directly adjacent to established single-family and multi-family residential neighborhoods is incongruous with this principle.8
Citywide policies within the Master Plan (Chapter 2) promote compatibility through consideration of scale, intensity, and design relative to existing neighborhoods, often requiring mitigation measures like setbacks, landscaping, and noise control.36 RMC Title 18 further reflects this goal by aiming to minimize objectionable impacts near residential zones.35 The proposed development, by its very nature, introduces uses and activities (transient lodging, large gatherings, commercial operations) that are dissimilar in character and intensity to the surrounding residential fabric, creating a stark and potentially disruptive adjacency.
While specific policies for the South Reno Planning Area (Chapter 3\) could not be directly accessed 17, the project's clear inconsistency with the citywide compatibility goals articulated in Chapter 2 and reflected in the Land Development Code provides a strong basis for finding non-compliance with the Master Plan.
The ReImagine Reno Master Plan places significant emphasis on conserving and enhancing the unique character of Reno's established residential neighborhoods.34 The Lakeridge area possesses a distinct character defined by its residential nature, its association with the golf course's scenic and relatively tranquil environment, and its "tucked-away feel".5 The proposed resort development threatens to irrevocably alter this character.
The scale of the project (100-room hotel, villas, spa, etc.), the intensity of uses (continuous hotel operations, potentially large and noisy events), and the introduction of a significant transient population are incompatible with the existing low-to-medium density residential environment.1 The developer's own statement about hoping to "create a whole new clientele" 7 implicitly signals an intention to change the area's usage patterns and atmosphere, directly contradicting the Master Plan's goal of preserving existing neighborhood character. This introduction of a distinctly different, commercially oriented "clientele" and associated activities undermines the stability and desirability of the adjacent residential community, conflicting with policies aimed at neighborhood preservation.34
While the developer asserts that the 18-hole golf course *playing area* will remain unchanged 1, the project involves the intensive development of a significant portion of the existing open space – the former driving range.7 The Master Plan generally promotes the protection and enhancement of open space resources throughout the city.36 Golf courses, even if privately owned, contribute significantly to the visual open space character, provide habitat, offer recreational amenities, and influence the ambiance of surrounding neighborhoods.
Developing the driving range area with a hotel, villas, parking lots, and other structures diminishes the overall open space value of the Lakeridge property. It replaces a visually open and low-intensity recreational use with dense, high-intensity commercial structures and associated activity. This reduction in functional and visual open space, and the potential negative impact on the scenic views and "tucked-away feel" currently associated with the course 5, conflicts with the spirit, if not the specific letter (due to inaccessible documents 17), of the Master Plan's open space preservation goals. The current zoning, Open Space (PGOS) 18, reflects the intended preservation of this land primarily for recreational and open space purposes, an intent undermined by the proposed commercialization.
Sound planning principles, as reflected in comprehensive plans like ReImagine Reno, typically direct high-intensity commercial and resort developments to designated nodes or corridors where infrastructure is adequate and conflicts with sensitive uses, like residential neighborhoods, can be minimized.36 The proposed location for the Lakeridge Resort, embedded within an established residential area and relying on local streets for access, appears fundamentally inappropriate for the scale and intensity of the development proposed.
The Master Plan's Growth and Reinvestment Framework (Chapter 4) likely outlines preferred locations for different types and intensities of development.36 It is improbable that this framework identifies an existing golf course surrounded by homes as a suitable location for a new 100-room hotel and event complex. Such intense uses are better suited to areas already zoned and planned for commercial activity, with direct access to major arterials and sufficient infrastructure capacity. Locating this project at Lakeridge forces an incompatible level of commercial intensity onto a site primarily valued for its recreational and open space character and its relationship with the adjacent residential community, contrary to the likely directives of the Master Plan's growth strategy.
The Lakeridge Golf Course property (APN 042-011-28) is subject to the City of Reno's zoning regulations under RMC Title 18. The general purpose of Open Space (PGOS) zoning is typically oriented towards recreation, conservation, and the preservation of open lands, precluding intensive commercial development.18 PGOS do not typically permit hotels, event centers, or associated commercial uses by right.
The applicant, The Duncan Group, seeks to overcome these restrictions by requesting a Zone Map Amendment (ZMA LDC25-00061) to establish a Specific Plan District (SPD) for the property.4 An SPD allows for the creation of customized zoning standards for a particular site.18 However, the creation of an SPD itself requires a ZMA and must meet the legal standards applicable to any zoning change. The proposal to create an SPD tailored specifically for this resort project underscores the fundamental incompatibility of the development with the existing zoning framework and the likely intent of the Master Plan for this area.
Any ZMA approved by the City of Reno must satisfy specific findings mandated by Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS Chapter 278) and detailed within RMC Title 18, likely in Section 18.08.503 (specific text inaccessible 16). Based on standard requirements for ZMAs in Nevada and inferences from related code sections, the Lakeridge Resort ZMA (LDC25-00061) fails to meet these critical legal prerequisites:
While SPDs provide a mechanism for flexible and creative site planning, this tool should not be misused to force fundamentally incompatible development into inappropriate locations. The purpose of an SPD is to achieve superior development outcomes consistent with the Master Plan, not to override its core principles. In this case, the request for an SPD appears primarily motivated by the desire to introduce uses and intensities that are otherwise prohibited by and incompatible with the logical zoning for the area (OS or LLR). Approving this project-driven SPD would set a dangerous precedent, suggesting that established zoning and Master Plan designations can be easily overturned for specific development proposals, regardless of their incompatibility with the surrounding community context. This constitutes a form of spot zoning, prioritizing the developer's interest over sound, comprehensive planning.
As established in Section II.B.2, the core components of the proposed Lakeridge Resort – specifically the 100-room hotel, any associated event/banquet facilities, and potentially large-scale restaurants, bars, or spa facilities – are uses that typically require the approval of Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) under RMC Title 18.22 The CUP process is specifically designed to allow the City to scrutinize uses that may have significant external impacts, ensuring they are compatible with their surroundings and that potential negative effects are adequately mitigated.20
The approval of any CUP is a discretionary act that requires the decision-making body (typically the Planning Commission, potentially the City Council for certain applications 39) to make specific, affirmative findings based on substantial evidence in the record.20 While the full text of RMC 18.08.605(e) detailing these findings was inaccessible 16, available code excerpts and standard planning practice indicate the necessary findings invariably include assessments of compatibility, consistency with the Master Plan, and the adequacy of mitigation measures for potential adverse effects.20 The proposed Lakeridge Resort fails to meet these essential criteria:
The discretionary nature of CUP approval means the City is not obligated to approve the permits, even if minimum standards are met, especially when substantial evidence demonstrates incompatibility and unmitigated negative impacts.20 The evidence clearly indicates the proposed resort uses fail to meet the necessary findings for CUP approval in this sensitive residential location.
Beyond the fundamental inconsistencies with the Master Plan and the failure to meet ZMA and CUP findings, the proposed Lakeridge Resort project is likely to violate specific development standards codified in RMC Title 18, Chapter 18.04, designed to protect public health, safety, and welfare, particularly in residential areas.
RMC Title 18 establishes specific noise limits to protect residential areas. Section 18.04.1408, applicable under the Residential Adjacency standards (Article 14), explicitly states that nighttime noise levels (between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.) measured at a residential property line shall not exceed 49 decibels (dB) Leq (average level) or 49 dB for a single, recurring event.40
The proposed hotel and, critically, any associated event facilities (hosting weddings, parties, corporate functions, etc.) pose a significant threat of violating this standard. Activities inherent to such uses include:
These noise sources, individually and collectively, are highly likely to exceed the stringent 49 dB nighttime limit at the property lines of adjacent homes.8 Public address systems are also specifically limited under residential adjacency rules.41 The table below provides a comparative analysis using typical noise levels for common resort activities against the RMC standard:
| Activity/Source | Estimated Noise Level (dBA/Leq) | RMC 18.04.1408 Nighttime Limit (10pm-7am) | Likely Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Outdoor Event Music (Moderate) | 55 \- 70+ | 49 dB Leq | No |
| Hotel Parking Lot (Night Activity) | 50 \- 60 (intermittent peaks) | 49 dB Leq / 49 dB single event | No |
| Large Commercial HVAC Unit | 50 \- 65 | 49 dB Leq | No |
| Waste Collection Truck | 70 \- 85 (brief single event) | 49 dB single event | No (if recurring) |
| Typical Quiet Residential Ambient | 35 \- 45 | 49 dB Leq | Yes |
Note: Estimated noise levels are illustrative, based on common acoustic data sources (external knowledge). Actual levels depend on specific equipment, distance, topography, and mitigation, but demonstrate the high potential for non-compliance.
This analysis clearly indicates that the operational noise associated with the proposed resort is fundamentally incompatible with the City's noise standards designed to protect residential tranquility. Furthermore, construction activities, while temporary, would also generate significant noise and potential vibration impacts 42 that must be managed according to code.
RMC Chapter 18.04, Article 13 provides detailed standards for exterior lighting to prevent glare and light trespass, particularly onto adjacent properties and public rights-of-way.42 Key requirements include:
A 100-room hotel, associated amenities, parking lots, and potential event areas will require extensive exterior lighting for safety, security, and ambiance. Given the close proximity to residential properties 8, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the project to comply fully with these standards. Light from guest room windows, parking lot illumination, pathway lighting, signage, and potentially outdoor event lighting will inevitably create glare and spill onto adjacent homes, disrupting darkness and privacy, regardless of fixture shielding attempts. The continuous, often all-night, nature of hotel lighting further exacerbates this impact, conflicting with the intent of the lighting ordinance and residential adjacency protections.
While the specific standards for Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) in RMC 18.04 were not accessible 18, the introduction of a major traffic generator like a 100-room hotel and event center into an established residential neighborhood raises significant concerns. The project will generate a substantial volume of new vehicle trips, including:
This traffic will primarily utilize local streets designed for residential traffic volumes and patterns (e.g., Golf Club Drive, Lakeridge Drive, impacting cross streets like Plumas St or S. McCarran Blvd indirectly). The increased volume, mix of vehicle types (including larger service vehicles), and potential for peak-hour congestion associated with events threaten to degrade traffic flow, compromise safety for existing residents (including pedestrians and cyclists), and increase noise and air pollution within the neighborhood. A comprehensive TIS must be mandated, with rigorous review focusing specifically on the capacity constraints and safety implications for the local residential street network. It is doubtful that mitigation measures short of major, disruptive, and character-altering road infrastructure improvements could adequately address the anticipated traffic impacts.
Similarly, specific parking requirements from RMC 18.04 are unavailable.18 However, adequate off-street parking is crucial for a development of this nature to avoid negative impacts on the surrounding area. The combined parking demand from a fully occupied 100-room hotel and a concurrent large event (e.g., wedding reception, conference) could easily exceed the capacity of the planned on-site parking facilities. This is a common issue with mixed-use resort developments. Insufficient on-site parking inevitably leads to spillover parking onto adjacent residential streets, causing congestion, inconvenience for residents, potential obstruction of driveways or emergency access, and aesthetic blight. The parking plan must be carefully evaluated for its ability to accommodate peak demand scenarios, including simultaneous hotel occupancy and maximum event attendance.
RMC Article 14, "Residential Adjacency," exists specifically to "promote compatible transitions between land use areas of differing intensities and to reduce potential negative impacts" when nonresidential development occurs near residential zones.41 This article applies directly to the Lakeridge Resort proposal due to its location adjacent to residentially zoned properties. 41 It includes specific limitations on uses (e.g., public address systems, outdoor storage), drive-throughs, grading near property lines, and enhanced standards for noise and lighting.41
While the applicant might attempt to demonstrate technical compliance with individual standards within Article 14 (e.g., providing required setbacks or screening), the sheer scale, intensity, and fundamentally commercial/transient nature of the proposed resort violate the overarching *purpose* and *intent* of these adjacency standards. Article 14 aims to make dissimilar uses compatible, but the proposed hotel and event center represent such a significant departure in character and impact from the surrounding residential neighborhood that true compatibility is likely unachievable, regardless of mitigation attempts. The project fundamentally fails to provide a "compatible transition."
Should the project be approved despite these inconsistencies, it is highly probable that ongoing violations related to noise, lighting, parking, and potentially unpermitted activities (e.g., events exceeding approved parameters) will arise. This would place a significant burden on adjacent residents, who would be forced to repeatedly file complaints, and on the City's Code Enforcement division, which would need to investigate and pursue remedies.28 Approving a project with such a high potential for generating nuisance conditions is poor planning and contrary to the goal of maintaining peaceful, desirable residential neighborhoods.
Should the Reno Planning Commission or City Council approve the Zone Map Amendment (LDC25-00061) or any associated Conditional Use Permits for the Lakeridge Resort project, ample grounds exist for an aggrieved party (such as adjacent property owners or affected neighborhood associations) to file a formal appeal.
The core arguments presented throughout this report form the substantive basis for denying the project's applications and, consequently, the grounds for an appeal if approvals are granted:
Reno Municipal Code provides a clear process for appealing land use decisions made by administrative officials or the Planning Commission to the Reno City Council.11 Key procedural elements include:
A pertinent contextual factor is the City of Reno's active engagement in updating various sections of its Land Development Code and related regulations. Ongoing efforts include reviews and potential amendments related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), the Sign Code, and potentially Live Entertainment standards, which often intersect with noise regulations.49 Approving a major, potentially controversial project like the Lakeridge Resort under the current code, particularly concerning aspects like noise and event impacts that might be subject to forthcoming revisions, could be seen as circumventing the City's own comprehensive planning efforts. Granting approvals just before updated, potentially more protective standards are adopted would undermine the public input process involved in those updates and could lock in a development that conflicts with the City's evolving vision for managing growth and protecting neighborhood quality of life. This timing issue could serve as a supplementary argument in an appeal, highlighting a potential inconsistency with the City's broader planning trajectory.
The analysis presented in this report demonstrates that the proposed Lakeridge Resort development, as submitted by The Duncan Group via application LDC25-00061 and anticipated Conditional Use Permit requests, is fundamentally flawed and unsuitable for its proposed location. The project suffers from significant deficiencies when evaluated against the City of Reno's adopted planning and regulatory framework:
Based on the substantial evidence of non-compliance with the Reno Master Plan and the Reno Municipal Code Title 18, and the failure to meet the required legal findings for necessary approvals, it is strongly recommended that the Reno Planning Commission and/or Reno City Council **DENY** the Zone Map Amendment application LDC25-00061 and any associated Conditional Use Permit applications submitted for the proposed Lakeridge Resort project on parcel 042-011-28.
Approval of this project would disregard the City's adopted planning framework, legitimize incompatible land uses in a sensitive residential setting, generate significant unmitigated negative impacts on the adjacent community, and set a detrimental precedent for future development decisions. Denial is necessary to uphold the integrity of the Master Plan and Zoning Code and to protect the character and quality of life of the established Lakeridge residential neighborhood.