October 29, 2019

Commissioner Koenig

said one workshop was held which Commissioner Strickland ran. Today's discussion would start with a presentation from NDOT. Bradley Richardson advised today's proceedings were for discussion only and no action was to be taken . The definition of deliberation was to collectively examine, weigh and reflect upon the reasons for or against the action. The term includes without limitation the collected discussion or exchange of facts preliminary to the ultimate decision . He cautioned the Commissioners to avoid that today and just listen to comments. He said he would be taking extensive notes.

Commissioner Koenig

said the main reason for this workshop was to get comments from the public on the proposed Code. It was not for discussion among the Commissioners and there would be no votes taken. It would go back to the RPC at some time and then come back to the Board. Lance Sundin from NDOT said he headed the outdoor advertising control program for the State. He discussed Map 21, signed into law by President Obama on July 6, 2012, which expanded their patrolling routes for outdoor advertising . SR160 was now part of the National Highway System and all signs on it had to be permitted through the State. October 29, 2019 2. Discussion concerning proposed amendments to Nye County Code 17.04.770, Signage Requirements applicable to the Pahrump Regional Planning District­ Cont'd.

Mr. Sundin

tried to put together a packet that would help the sign owners become familiar with the permit requirements. On NDOT's Web site there was a signs and billboards section which contained the forms that could be filled in, printed and brought into the office. He mentioned the federal law only allowed billboards in commercial and industrial zones , not residential or agriculture.

Commissioner Strickland

asked staff to add a copy of Mr. Sundin 's packet to the back­ up after the meeting. Brett Waggoner pointed out this information was adopted in 2012.

Mr. Sundin

had heard NDOT needed to get going on this as the feds were aggravated with the lack of movement. It could cost NDOT 10% of their allowance from the FHWA, which was substantial.

Commissioner Strickland

said the previous workshop left off on page 11 with elimination of such brilliance and/or position to be blinding or dazzling the vision of travelers . The review was done page by page . There was discussion among the Commissioners as to why this was scheduled as a Board of County Commissioners meeting rather than a Planning workshop .

Mr. Richardson

reiterated discussion was permitted , but not deliberation to weigh or reflect upon the reasons for or against any action, which would include any collective discussion or exchange of fact preliminary to an ultimate decision. He said the Board was very limited .

Commissioner Blundo

suggested rather than going page by page like was done during the first workshop people should share their thoughts and feelings about what they liked and did not like. He believed it would go back to Planning at the RPC level.

Commissioner Koenig

said it should go back to Planning , then to the RPC, and then back to the Board with everything revised.

Commissioner Strickland

suggested kicking it down to the RPC level and asking them to hold the workshops since they could answer the questions. Tommy Murphy wondered why the County was taking on mobile signs referenced on page 11, section 3.c. Regarding roof mounted signs, Mr. Murphy said there were a lot of those in the valley and that regulation could hurt local businesses. He also did not understand why painting on walls was a prohibited display . On page 12, Mr. Murphy read "For the purpose of this section the car, truck, trailer or similar other vehicle for the October 29, 2019 2. Discussion concerning proposed amendments to Nye County Code 17.04.770, Signage Requirements applicable to the Pahrump Regional Planning District­ Cont'd. purpose of advertising will be considered stationary by remaining parked in the same location for eight hours ." Business owners worked all hours of the night, but now parking in front of their business for eight hours was a violation. Also, they would not be allowed to park in their own driveway over night. Norma Jean Opatik said she wrapped her vehicle and it was parked at her office 12-14 hours a day, which would now be a violation. She felt the ordinance was ludicrous when it came to personal vehicles or painted walls and was restricting what people could do on their own personal property. Ms. Opatik said this would put real estate agents in a very difficult position.

Mr. Waggoner

said section 10 excluded that situation . It said vehicles associated with a contractor or service provider where during non-business hours the vehicle was either parked in an industrial zoned district or designated parking areas of the main store or office. That was meant to address billboard vehicles being parked along the highway advertising a business .

Mr. Murphy

felt it was worded to be interpreted however the proper authority wanted to interpret it and it needed to be clarified .

Ms. Opatik

felt the sign ordinance needed to clarify that real estate signs, for sale signs for properties and those types of things were exempt from most of this. There was no reason a real estate agent should have to get a permit to put a for sale sign on someone's property that wanted to sell their house.

Mr. Waggoner

stated there was an exclusion for real estate signs on properties with active listings. There were size restrictions as well as setback and separation requirements .

Commissioner Strickland

said there was a suggested change on page 8 from the last workshop that the 4' x 8' signs could be two and/or double sided .

Ms. Opatik

said her concern was basically for real estate agents so they were allowed to put their signs where needed to sell property , otherwise property owners and real estate agents were put in a bad situat ion.

Commissioner Koenig

said the Board rejected this for a reason so the comments should be directed to the RPC.

Mr. Waggoner

explained this was an attempt to try to clarify some of the bill. He pointed out it had been on the agenda five times seeking this kind of feedback. He suggested leaving it the way it was today if everyone was okay with that. October 29, 2019 2. Discussion concerning proposed amendments to Nye County Code 17.04.770, Signage Requirements applicable to the Pahrump Regional Planning District­ Cont'd.

Commissioner Koenig

said nothing was going to happen today because he did not have a revised bill and they could not discuss, deliberate or adopt it. He believed this should be a planning commission meeting so questions could be answered . Roy Mankins was concerned with billboards and any billboards not currently on a commercial zoned lot and had existed for 20 years or so. He asked how the zoning would be changed to comply with the new ordinance.

Mr. Waggoner

explained it would require some documentation showing when it was installed to meet the grandfather provisions. Until the sign was reconstructed , altered, expanded or anything like that , it was a permissive use at the time provided it was installed prior to the adoption of any code. Ronnie Murphy said all super structures on the highway were put in before 2004 and asked if that would make them grandfathered.

Mr. Waggoner

said it was a non-conforming permissive use, meaning at the time it was installed it was a permissive installation. If there was a building permit required that was never pulled, then it would not be a conforming sign.

Mr. Murphy

asked for the reasoning behind the provision that if the billboard was destroyed more than 50% it could not be rebuilt.

Mr. Waggoner

said because if more than 50% of it had to be rebuilt he would consider that a brand new structure.

Mr. Sundin

said NDOT was going to come in to permit and people had to follow the law. For example, a super structure was on residential property so it was not conforming. As far as Mr. Sundin was concerned NDOT would not ask someone to take it down. They would grandfather it, get it permitted, and allow it to live out its life.

Mr. Murphy

felt the sign ordinance as written was specifically designed for the elimination of all non-conforming signs. Billboards had a life expectancy and it was not anyone's intent to allow that board to be rebuilt or improved. The sign ordinance says like material had to be used when improving so if he had a wood sign and wanted to improve it with steel he could not do it.

Commissioner Strickland

noted only if it was a non-conforming sign on a residential lot. If it met all requirements of the current sign ordinance and the State 's requirements he was good . October 29,2019 2. Discussion concerning proposed amendments to Nye County Code 17.04.770, Signage Requirements applicable to the Pahrump Regional Planning District­ Cont'd.

Mr. Murphy

did not see a provision where he would be able to fix his if destroyed by a natural disaster or for safety reasons.

Mr. Waggoner

said Mr. Murphy could with a permit.

Mr. Murphy

said that depended on him being able to conform with the new regulations since he was on a residential lot.

Commissioner Koenig

asked if Mr. Murphy wanted to replace the top piece of wood with iron he had to make the rest of the sign conform to today's regulations also.

Mr. Sundin

advised any non-conforming or grandfathered conforming sign that sustained damage from wind or accidental external influence beyond the control of the owner of the sign in excess of 50% of the cost of the components of the supporting structure shall be deemed totally destroyed .

Mr. Murphy

asked what the State's linear foot spacing for billboards was noting this ordinance stated 750 feet. 1'v1r. Sundin said no structures may be spaced less than 300 feet apart. Dawn Murphy agreed with Ronnie Murphy on the non-conforming billboards and at 50% their livelihood was being taken away. She also disagreed with the eight hour time limit on page 11 as that meant her husband could not come home in his work truck and park it at the house for longer than eight hours. She also took exception with the rules for the holiday light displays on page 13.

Commissioner Cox

said the grandfather definition did not fit in Pahrump. People came here for specific reasons and the Board should make the laws compatible for the people doing business here. She thought the grandfather law needed to be looked at also. Tim McKoy said some people who had billboards were not able to do LED or animated billboards because of the cost, but those were now getting more affordable. The ordinance was written in such a way that only casinos could use those signs.

Mr. Waggoner

said that was what it said, but the definition of an animated sign was a sign with parts or sections which revolve or move or have flashing or intermittent lights not including time and temperature signs or electronic message signs. What Mr. McKoy described would be an electronic message sign. Tommy Murphy questioned the language on page 19, section K.3.a., which stated the electronic message center component of a sign may comprise no more than 50% of a October 29, 2019 2. Discussion concerning proposed amendments to Nye County Code 17.04.770, Signage Requirements applicable to the Pahrump Regional Planning District­ Cont'd. sign's total sign area, which meant Mr. McKoy could only use 50% of his 14' x 48' billboard. He would like it written that they could put up electronic billboards. Regarding non-conformance of signs, Ms. Opatik said there was a lighting ordinance which required down lighting. When she complained about them she was told they were informed and had five years to change it.

Mr. Waggoner

said he would have to read that part of the Code, but that had to do with street lighting, parking lot lighting , etc. If Ms. Opatik complained about a sign on the highway or public road which was causing her a problem then Planning would address it immediately.

Ms. Opatik

would like to see a time limit for compliance in the ordinance . Ray Guin said he did not understand how a billboard could be grandfathered in but could not be improved for safety as that would result in the loss of the grandfather.

Mr. Waggoner

explained if the size or design were not changing and only repairs would be made because it was falling apart then he would consider that grandfathered, but the permit would still be required for the work to be done.

Mr. Guin

asked what if it got knocked over by a vehicle.

Mr. Waggoner

said he did not know the State's standing, but to him it would be a grandfathered use because the sign was there and nothing was being done except putting it back the way it was . If a complete redesign was done or two billboards were put up that was completely different.

Mr. Guin

discussed the eight hour parking restriction for wrapped cars at people 's homes.

Mr. Waggoner

explained if it had to do with the business the car could be parked at the office for 24 hours. If there was a gravel company that wanted to park on the property associated with the business, there was an exclusion that covered that, but he agreed it needed to be clarified to address handymen businesses. This was meant to keep mobile billboards from being parked around town to advertise businesses that had nothing to do with that property . Addit ionally, it was not meant for wraps so that needed to be addressed as well.

Mr. Guin

did not understand the regulations regarding painted buildings, roof mounted signs, or backlit awning signs . October 29, 2019 2. Discussion concerning proposed amendments to Nye County Code 17.04.770, Signage Requirements applicable to the Pahrump Regional Planning District­ Cont'd. Tommy Murphy referred to page 22, billboards, which said no billboard may have a display surface greater than 672 square feet, which was about a standard 14' x 48', but made it so no one could put extensions on their boards or pop-ups.

Commissioner Koenig

asked what embellishment meant and if the additional 128 square feet was added to the 672 square feet.

Mr. Waggoner

believed that was what that was saying, but he clarified if someone had a billboard today that was smaller, larger, whatever, adding something like that on it would change the sign . Tommy Murphy referred to electronic boards could not be larger than 12 feet tall . He noted a standard billboard was 14 feet tall so that would mean a portion of the sign would not be used if converted to electronic.

Mr. Waggoner

asked if Tommy Murphy's suggestion was 14 feet, which Mr. Murphy thought would be okay. Casey Steinhart referred to page 15, signs permitted in commercial zones . He said one problem was the 50% of the building . He understood trying to make everything neat, but in some towns signs could not be seen because they were so small. He thought the requirement for a sign to be architecturally compatible with the principal structure was subjective instead of objective and having ornamental requirements for signs in commercial zones was getting away from what Pahrump was. Regarding the sign area, if it was less than 40,000 square feet a 10' x 10' sign or smaller was allowed . Mr. Steinhart said that was not very big and another restriction that was much too narrow for the type of businesses most people try to bring.

Mr. Waggoner

stated that was in the Code today and was not being changed.

Mr. Steinhart

said he knew it was in there before, but it may not necessarily work for the businesses here. Since changing the sign ordinance was being talked about he thought some of the existing areas in it that were not really compatible could also be looked at.

Mr. Waggoner

asked what Mr. Steinhart 's suggested change would be.

Mr. Steinhart

said the change would be with the size of 50% as that could be pretty small depending on the size of the building. Tommy Murphy suggested about 25% of the entire wall space on any given wall. October 29, 2019 2. Discussion concerning proposed amendments to Nye County Code 17.04.770, Signage Requirements applicable to the Pahrump Regional Planning District­ Cont'd.

Mr. Steinhart

asked if the surface area was 50% of the side the sign was being put on or the total surface of the building.

Mr. Waggoner

said it was of each wall. Wall signs may occupy 50% of the building or wall face upon which the sign was mounted.

Mr. Steinhart

thought 25% of the building would be more in line.

Mr. Waggoner

advised the International Sign Association, a lobbyist for sign companies, reviewed this draft on behalf of business owners and sign companies that made a living doing these signs and made some suggestions .

Ms. Opatik

said on page 15, section F.k., it talked about window displays covering less than 50% of each window . She asked if that included the holiday display signs that covered the windows of the business temporarily.

Mr. Waggoner

said that would be exempt.

Mr. McKoy

said page 11 talked about flags . During the 4th of July season he put up 24 United States flags, but this bill now said he could not.

Mr. Waggoner

clarified it excluded United States flags.

Mr. McKoy

asked about 100% of the window being painted not being allowed. I\/Ir. Waggoner said it was excluded if it was a window display covering less than 50%. If the window was going to be used as signage then it would go through a sign review just like today. However, if 50% was image and the rest was color it would be exempt. Walt Turner suggested forming a committee comprised of an RPC member and possibly a Commissioner mixed with the public to make edits to the current one and address the list of Planning 's problems and submit that re-write. He volunteered to meet with the public.

Commissioner Koenig

said the Board could not make that decision now.

Commissioner Strickland

asked if the Board stopped working on this document if it would automatically go back to the RPC, to which Commissioner Koenig responded theoretically.

Commissioner Blundo

asked where the majority of the changes were coming from. October 29, 2019 2. Discussion concerning proposed amendments to Nye County Code 17.04.770, Signage Requirements applicable to the Pahrump Regional Planning District­ Cont'd.

Mr. Waggoner

said he did not know the complete history, but the sign ordinance was something that began before his time with the County. At one of the first RPC meetings he attended there was discussion about a sign ordinance and he thought at that point a draft was presented that was not well liked. Planning had also been trying to address the multitude of signs along the highway , many of which either had no advertising or advertised for businesses that no longer existed. Additionally, the public had pointed out things that were not clear and it contained terms and references to technology that no longer existed .

Commissioner Koenig

adjourned the meeting. ATTEST: ,2019. ~C~LA<d2MaA Ny C nty Clerk I Deputy