April 10, 2013

Commissioner McCall

takes roll and stated that all members are present.

Commissioner King

stated on page 8 it says “air” it should be err.

Commissioner McCall

motions to approve the minutes with stated changes. Commissioner Hafen seconds.

Commissioner Hafen

motions to approve the agenda. Commissioner McCall seconds.

Commissioner Koenig

stated they are meeting tomorrow 4/11/13 at the Bob Rudd Community Center at 2 pm. d. PRPD Master Plan Update Steering Committee - Gregory T. Hafen II

Commissioner Hafen

stated he had nothing to report.

Commissioner King

, attended for informational purposes, the presentation by Mr. Morales regarding his proposed landfill. Attending makes no difference in his perception of the process.

Commissioner Earl

, attended for informational purposes, the presentation by Mr. Morales regarding his proposed landfill. Commissioner Earl did ask a question at the presentation and will be asking the same question during the hearing of Mr. Morales’ application.

Commissioner Hafen

, Read disclosure statement regarding item #9, for CU-12-0020. “I am making the following disclosure because since the first meeting the applicant has questioned whether or not I have a conflict of interest. I feel I do not have any conflict of interest pursuant to NRS 281A.420 in this item that would affect my vote in any manner. “The utility company that I am employed by does use VBL Environmental & Joe’s Sanitation to remove and process sludge at its dewatering plant. After this sludge is dewatered the effluent is returned to the utility company’s treatment plant. I do not own any stock in the utility company nor would I receive any monetary gain from voting on this matter. I also believe that it is irrelevant to this item that my employer uses Mr. Shay’s dewatering plant. I have not accepted any gifts or loans from Mr. Shay or his businesses, I have no pecuniary interest in anything related to Mr. Shay or his businesses, nor do I have any commitment in a private capacity to the interests of others that would affect my independence of judgment. Pahrump Valley Disposal does pick up my trash at my house and at my employer’s business as Pahrump Valley Disposal has the exclusive right to solid waste pick-up in the Pahrump Valley, which is the same service provided to any other member of the general public or business in Pahrump which has or needs trash pick-up. I conclude that the independence of judgment of a reasonable person in my situation would not be materially affected in this matter and because this is not a clear case of a disqualifying conflict of interest, I am going to be voting in this matter. The District Attorney’s office has advised me that I make this disclosure.”

Commissioner McCall

, attended for informational purposes, the presentation by Mr. Morales regarding his proposed landfill. Doesn’t believe it causes a conflict of interest.

Commissioner Goode

, Abstaining from item #9. Has a conflict of interest regarding providing mentor and consulting work provided for Top Rank Builders, therefore he will not be voting on this item. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Application (Continued from the December 12, 2012, January 16, 2013 and March 13, 2013 RPC meetings):

Commissioner Koenig

refers to Staff. Steve Osborne states applicant has submitted a letter modifying request, changing it to a Class 3, which is a construction and demolition landfill. This type of landfill receives roadwork material, excavated waste, demolition waste, construction waste, and site clearance waste. Specifically, such as concrete, asphalt, wood, glass, brick, and metals would be allowed. Based on the modification of the application staff is recommending approval subject to the twenty-two special conditions outlined in the staff report.

Commissioner Koenig

refers to the applicant. Rene Morales, applicant, thanks the RPC for giving him an opportunity to come back before them to present his project and staff for their recommendation of approval. They are in agreement with all conditions, with the exception of #15, which they will address later.

Mr. Morales

describes the history of the subject property, the approval last year of an asphalt batch plant, and describes their current proposed project. Will donate 2.5% of net profits to school district and 2.5% of net profits to parks and recreation committee. The facility will stay in compliance with Federal, State and County regulations. Hugh Walker, SES Engineers gives a presentation on the landfill, and the purpose of the project. The landfill will be contained within the 30 acre site. They will be dealing with 12- 20 trucks a day. Jim Smyth, Kaempfer Crowell, there are 22 conditions and with the exception of three they are in agreement with them. The issue with Condition #5 is that they can’t get their state permits until they get their CUP. The concern that is addressed in that condition is duplicated in Condition #1. They will comply with that but can’t get to the next step without the CUP approval. Condition # 15, for technical reasons they can’t be bound to 19.5 acres, if you are going from a technical to conceptual plan. Condition #17, they are agreeing to this but they weren’t anticipating the language that would state they would be limited. Condition #22 is in agreement but they need to have a confidentiality agreement that it is just for Government use. In regards to Condition #14, they are in agreement but would need to expand it to 6 am to 4 pm, due to needing to give them a lunch hour. They have never been seeking to dispose of toxic waste at the site. There are several conditions with protections of the county in place that they are in agreement with.

Commissioner Koenig

states Item #5 means they may or may not get permission tonight and then later on they get their other permits.

Mr. Smyth

stated he over thought the language, he understood it as it isn’t approved until they get the Federal and State permits. If they approve it subject to that condition their concern would be it isn’t approved until they get a State permit.

Mr. Kunzi

stated it is approved but it is a condition of the permit. You can use it to get your NDEP permit. If you don’t get the NDEP permit or the permit from the BOCC as would be required then you would not be able to then,

Commissioner Koenig

stated you effectively defaulted on the condition and you lose it.

Mr. Kunzi

stated that is correct.

Commissioner Koenig

stated on #15 he isn’t sure what to do with the 19.5 acres, how many should it be or shouldn’t it be, and he agrees for #17 when they come back with the plan they Page 4 of 16 can see how big it is. Commissioner Koenig stated if Mr. Kunzi doesn’t have an issue with the confidentiality agreement then neither does he.

Mr. Kunzi

stated it is a private company and the confidentiality agreement is for government only and no proprietary information will be disclosed and is standard for these types of relationships.

Commissioner Koenig

stated they said 12 to 20 trucks a day to start with or will it end up at 200.

Mr. Morales

stated that is what he would like to start with.

Commissioner Koenig

stated what he is concerned with is the road, traffic and noise. We may want to put in another condition that says you can only do 20 a day maximum, 50 a day maximum. Is 12 to 20 the number?

Mr. Morales

stated yes, 12 to 20 is the number.

Commissioner Koenig

stated 6 am to 4 pm is a 10 hour day. With one hour lunch it makes it a 9 hour day. He suggests 7 to 4 pm and no Sundays.

Mr. Morales

stated he wants to make sure his employees have an 8 hour day, and says 7 to 4 is fine with no Sundays.

Commissioner King

asks Mr. Kunzi if the wording on #5 could be changed to the landfill will not begin operating.

Mr. Kunzi

stated it is covered in item #6.

Commissioner King

stated the hours are 7-4 correct?

Commissioner King

states he doesn’t see limiting to 19.5 acres.

Mr. Osborne

stated it was based on their conceptual site plan, their site plan showed 19.5 acres.

Commissioner King

asks if the applicant would like to do all 30 acres.

Mr. Walker

stated when you design a site like this it goes through a number of reviews. In order to meet the concerns of the Planning Department they wanted to see a conceptual drawing, it is not an engineered drawing. The intent is to fill the entire 30 acres, but not to exceed that.

Commissioner Koenig

states we can strike item #15 if we make a motion to approve.

Commissioner Earl

is concerned about the property located around the area and the water. What do you have in mind to protect the water?

Mr. Smyth

stated in regards to the water they have narrowed the classification. The only thing going in the hole is inert material. He doesn’t see this will harm the property value.

Mr. Morales

stated he believes it will improve the lots values as time progresses. There will no longer be a hole in the ground, which is an eye sore right now.

Commissioner Earl

has a problem with asphalt and organic material they plan on putting in the ground. The insulation is all fiber glass and it is a hazardous material. Page 5 of 16

Mr. Walker

stated it is part of the NDEP permit that they have site restrictions and have a Hydrogeologic investigation, there will be no municipal solid waste accepted. Most of the materials will be compactable.

Mr. Morales

stated he will try to compact the material as much as he can, the wood isn’t going to be very much he plans on making it into mulch or wood chips. He wants to use a material recycling facility also.

Commissioner Earl

stated in the letter in the backup it states they are planning to use 30 to 50,000 gallons a year. That isn’t a reasonable amount of water to get the proper compaction.

Mr. Walker

stated that amounts to 190 gallons a day and they will probably use more than that.

Commissioner Hafen

stated item #15 could have been a concern that there was a buffer zone.

Mr. Osborne

stated they looked at their conceptual plan and limit it to what they had on their plan.

Commissioner Hafen

stated the site plan showed a 10 ft buffer.

Mr. Morales

stated it is more than that he will have to go with the ROW which is 30 ft. Tim Dahl, from Public Works, stated it will be to dedicate 30 ft on Ave of the Stars, Blue Jay and all the interior lines and 40 ft on Panorama.

Commissioner Hafen

reviews Condition #16, states that this will go 10 ft above the surrounding ground. Does this include the 3 ft of dirt on top.

Mr. Walker

stated it is 7 ft above the material and 3 ft of cover. It may be somewhat thicker depending on the material they have to use.

Commissioner Hafen

asks if number 16 is an issue if they are limiting it to 10 ft.

Commissioner Hafen

stated he has some issues with it being surrounded by high density ½ acre lots. He finds it hard to recommend approval based on this, he is also concerned with the Municipal Well Field and domestic wells that are directly downstream. According to the CSWPP in the staff report states a solid waste landfill is a high risk for contamination and this project is within the 10 capture zone. It is ½ mile from the Desert Utilities well #1 and 1 mile from their well #2.

Commissioner Koenig

stated with condition #10 is it safe to say they will comply with CFR257.2.

Mr. Smyth

is not familiar with that CFR.

Mr. Walker

stated that they will comply.

Commissioner King

stated he wants to be assured there will be no direct dumping into the hole. Everything that will go in there will be on the slab to be inspected, sorted, recycled and be disposed of. Is that correct?

Mr. Morales

stated that is correct. Page 6 of 16

Commissioner King

asked Mr. Morales if it will be closed up at night.

Mr. Morales

stated yes, he doesn’t want anyone dumping for free.

Commissioner Carbone

stated Mr. Morales stated to start with he will have 12 – 20 trucks. Are you going to follow with what is in this documents, starting with 12 – 20 and then go up to 40 or 60, which would be outside the CUP.

Mr. Morales

stated if they want to limit it to 20 trucks he will take that, but as a business man in the next 3 or 4 years he would like to 22 trucks or 25, he could create more jobs, pay more taxes but will leave it up to the RPC.

Commissioner Carbone

stated the CUP is for 3 years, does that mean you will come back in 3 years for a revision to the CUP?

Commissioner Koenig

stated the CUP is forever for the property but he has to have construction started within 3 years.

Mr. Morales

stated if he wants a change he will come back and ask for permission.

Commissioner Carbone

asks if Mr. Morales will plan on keeping the property forever or selling it after the landfill is done?

Mr. Morales

stated he plans on keeping it forever.

Commissioner Carbone

asks if Mr. Morales will put something together anything what his water consumption will be?

Mr. Walker

stated it will be used primarily for Dust Control, and the rule of thumb is to keep the roads visibly wet.

Commissioner Carbone

asks if they can give a definition of rubble.

Mr. Walker

stated if they are asking if that is part of the agreement it is construction demolition.

Commissioner Koenig

stated that is why if they were going to comply with 40CFR 257.02 it defines rubble and what can’t go into the landfill.

Commissioner Carbone

stated they will be separating the materials, and asks if they will be doing something with the rebar, wire and other materials you will pull out and doing something else besides putting in the land fill.

Commissioner Hafen

asks Mr. Walker about his statement on the roads being visibly wet as a rule of thumb for water consumption.

Mr. Walker

stated normally the standard is for dust control rules they have to be visibly wet. Depending on the length of the road they will have to calculate what the need is and they aren’t at that point yet.

Commissioner Hafen

stated the staff report says somewhere between 30,000 to 50,000 a year, that is roughly 10 truckloads of water. That is far too little water to keep the roads wet.

Mr. Walker

stated that is 196 gallons a day. Page 7 of 16

Commissioner Hafen

asks if they are looking at 100 times that?

Mr. Walker

stated he doesn’t know, when they get into construction level drawings he can better answer that.

Commissioner Hafen

asks Mr. Morales with the amount of water consumption that will be determined in the future, where do you plan on getting this water from?

Mr. Morales

stated he has a commercial well on site with water rights.

Commissioner Hafen

asks how many water rights?

Mr. Morales

stated 5 acre feet, if he needs more he will acquire more. For right now he believes they have plenty of water.

Commissioner Hafen

stated 5 acre feet is only enough for 1 acre of land, Mr. Morales has 30 acres. That is nowhere near enough water for 30 acres.

Mr. Morales

stated if we get to the approval if he needs to acquire 2 or 3 or 100 ft of water rights he will.

Mr. Walker

stated typically what you use the water trucks for is strictly on the haul road, you wouldn’t water the whole 30 acres. You would water once maybe twice a day depending on the climate conditions are and you use a 5000 gallon truck.

Commissioner Koenig

refers to the applicants.

Mr. Smyth

stated they agree with the staff conditions with the exception to the conditions that were discussed. They request that you approve the application subject to the conditions of staff, they address their concerns, with the exception to their minor concerns. Page 8 of 16

Mr. Morales

stated he is trying to help create jobs and help the community.

Commissioner Koenig

refers to staff and asks for a motion.

Commissioner Hafen

motions to deny CU-12-0020 based on the conditions of approval or the findings under NCC 17.04.920L, #2 this property will not be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity; #3 the conditional use may be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses, and this is not an appropriate location based on the Village Residential zoning on three sides of the property, #4 the conditional use is not a substantial improvement to property in the immediate vicinity and to the community as a whole. It will not be a substantial improvement to the Village Residential Lots directly in the vicinity; and #6 the conditional use may potentially create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and may be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, because of the direct line to the well field of Desert Utilities being within the 10 year capture zone based on the Community Sources Water Protection Plan.

Mr. Kunzi

stated he heard Mr. Hafen make reference to CU-12-0021 and it should have been CU-12-0020.

Commissioner Hafen

corrected his motion to reflect CU-12-0020.

Commissioner Koenig

refers to Staff. Beth Lee reviews the project. This is a request for a reinstatement of a grandfathered use to reopen the subject property as a bar on property zoned Neighborhood Commercial. Staff has concerns regarding the well as it has sat idle for a year. Application will need to follow NDEP procedures to reactivate an inactive well. Staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions of approval outlined in the staff report.

Commissioner Hafen

verified the applicant will need to go before NDEP to reactive the inactive well. Does that include water testing?

Ms. Lee

stated she spoke with a representative from the Las Vegas NDEP office and they stated the procedure does include water quality testing in the procedure. Page 9 of 16

Commissioner Hafen

asked Public Works about conditions of approval numbers 6, 7, and 8. Were these meant to be one condition not three separate conditions?

Mr. Tim

Dahl stated that is correct.

Commissioner Hafen

stated if we decide to include those conditions, we should amend that to be one condition. Bell Vista is already paved, correct?

Mr. Dahl

confirmed Bell Vista is paved and Stephanie is chip sealed.

Commissioner Hafen

asked of the applicant is being required to lay down 10” of Type II and 3 ½” of asphalt over that? Or are you asking the applicant to tear it out and redo that?

Mr. Dahl

stated at the time the County determines that to be necessary, those are the minimum standards we expect development to contribute to the infrastructure they are impacting.

Commissioner Hafen

states #6 actually states owner must improve to Nye County standards, it doesn’t say at any specific time.

Mr. Dahl

stated it’s meant to be worded to give the applicant a choice – build it now, pay for it now, or agree to participate in future improvements.

Commissioner Koenig

asked the applicant to come to the microphone and give them an overview of her project. Andrea McGuire thanked the RPC for considering her application. She stated they have improvement goals and big ideas for the property. They would like to be involved in the community. By doing this project, they feel they will be able to add some adult activities with the bar, different venues being part of the community, such as the Chamber of Commerce, horse community, community clubs. They are all for improving the property above and beyond the requirements. Asked if paving the parking lot can be something they can do later and not a requirement to open the bar right away. Erin Hubbell agreed with everything Ms. McGuire stated. They want to be great community partners. Agrees they want to bring the property up to standards. They have ideas about creating curb appeal and they want to clean up the property right away and change the previous reputation, however, can’t see paving the parking lot right away.

Commissioner Hafen

asked Mr. Hubbell if he was a business partner.

Mr. Hubbell

stated he will be the general manager.

Commissioner Hafen

clarified that the paving conversation he had with Public Works was in regards to the requirement of paving Bell Vista and Stephanie, not paving the parking lot.

Commissioner Hafen

asked for clarification on what applicant meant by adult entertainment.

Ms. McGuire

stated she just meant because they had a bar license and you have to be 21 to drink, not any other sort of adult activities, like brothels or sexually oriented businesses.

Mr. Hubbell

stated they don’t understand the requirements of paving. They thought it referred to the parking lot.

Commissioner Koenig

explained the purpose and intent of the condition. Page 10 of 16

Mr. Dahl

affirmed Commissioner Koenig’s explanation of the condition, and clarified they are not asking the development to do those improvements at this time, and giving them choices on how to handle it.

Mr. Hubbell

stated he now understands the condition.

Commissioner Hafen

asked if the applicant has read the remaining conditions, understands them and agrees to them.

Ms. McGuire

stated she wasn’t completely clear about condition #4.

Ms. Lee

clarified that interior renovations requiring a building permit, first requires approval of a Tenant Improvement application.

Mr. Hubbell

asked if there was a definition available of the grandfathered clause.

Commissioner Koenig

stated you can operate the business as it was before, you can’t expand it. If you want to expand it you need to come back to see us.

Mr. Hubbell

stated that is how he understood it and wanted to make sure they were following what was necessary.

Commissioner King

stated the grandfathering is explained in the staff report, page 4. Asked if they still had questions about paving the parking lot, in regards to condition #8 under the dust control ordinance. It doesn’t specifically say you have to pave, but you have to comply with dust control requirements for vehicle parking.

Ms. McGuire

asked what that meant.

Mr. Hubbell

stated does that just mean putting down type II and following dust control measures? We’re absolutely prepared to follow those and be compliant.

Commissioner King

affirmed that and said it means any sort of dust palliative, concrete, asphalt, double layer chip seal.

Mr. Osborne

stated if you approve this CUP, you’re allowing them to go back to what they had before which was not a paved parking lot.

Commissioner King

asked so the dust control portion – what are we saying?

Mr. Dahl

answered stating it reminds the applicant that they can’t be creating additional dust on the property. Under a tenant improvement we don’t have the opportunity to review, so we don’t have the opportunity to ask the applicant for paved parking. As far as 17.04.730 it means there is no parking in the County ROW.

Mr. Dahl

stated Bell Vista is a County road out to the state line, about 15 miles out.

Commissioner Hafen

motions to approve CU-13-0004 based on the conditions, except conditions #6, 7 and 8, he would like those stricken. Commissioner McCall seconds.

Commissioner Koenig

refers to staff.

Ms. Lee

reviews the staff report, the map is consistent with adopted code and compliant with regulations and staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions listed on pages 3 – 5.

Commissioner Hafen

refers to permit 84071 and asks Ms. Lee if it had been revoked.

Ms. Lee

stated from the NDWR it has been cancelled for failure to act on the part of the applicant. There has been a request for review hearing of that scheduled for April 17 at the NDWR Las Vegas Branch.

Commissioner Hafen

asked if this is the permit that is supplying the occupied building.

Ms. Lee

stated that the permit number is attached to the well existing on the parcel.

Commissioner Hafen

stated so the existing well has no water rights attached to it, and has been cancelled.

Ms. Lee

stated that is correct.

Commissioner Koenig

stated so they are supplying water to the existing business from a well that doesn’t have any water rights.

Commissioner McCall

asked if the septic servicing the building will be on the new lot?

Ms. Lee

stated that is correct, when the development was done it was determined it was the ideal place for the septic and leach field. This map will create a utility easement for the sharing of the septic. Page 12 of 16

Commissioner Koenig

refers to the applicant. Dave Richards, Civilwise services, representing applicant, Nate Lechtenberg. This parcel used to be two lots when it was created, it was then turned into one lot and it is now trying to become two lots sharing the well and septic. It was designed to handle the entire site not just the one commercial Family Dollar. The water system was designed to handle the entire site. The parcel as it is developed can handle another business. If the property on the corner is sold to another commercial entity they then will have to enter into an agreement to shared used of the Commercial water rights, water system and septic system. The easements and all the agreements would be made at that time.

Commissioner Goode

asks where the property line that runs East and West, is it along the four tanks on the map?

Mr. Richards

stated it is the darker line that jogs through the parking lot.

Commissioner Goode

asks if the tanks will be located on the South property? And if the are already sized for it.

Mr. Richards

stated yes and the tanks will be located on an easement created for that specific purpose.

Commissioner Koenig

asks what happens if the water renewal falls through.

Mr. Richards

stated then the owner would have to buy more water rights and move them to the site. The problem with the water was there was a deadline date that was lost in transition and the extension wasn’t sent in on time and it was denied and the water rights were revoked. They haven’t received a letter from the state and is under appeal.

Commissioner Hafen

stated the State Engineers gives a 30 day grace period after the deadline, however the permit 80471 staff stated that was the current permit that was being used for the dollar store, is that correct.

Mr. Richards

stated that is correct.

Commissioner Hafen

stated that is only two acre feet, County Code stated you dedicate an additional two acre feet in addition to the two acre feet for that parcel. Where is the other two acre feet coming from? There needs to be four acre feet dedicated for the approval of this parcel map.

Mr. Richards

stated that condition applies to residential use of water, commercial water rights for any establishment have to get commercial water rights for that establishment. When the property is determined to be commercial it is a different process than what you are referring to a parcel map for residential uses. He has spoke with Planning and RPC and commercial uses of property always requires water rights, in that case the water rights have to be put on the property. The owner has to buy the water rights, put them on the property and designate them for commercial use. It is outside of the requirement for 2 acre feet to be dedicated to the county. The condition you mentioned doesn’t pertain to commercial water rights.

Commissioner Hafen

stated if this permit has nothing to do with this application why is it being brought up.

Mr. Richards

stated it does, the original owner of the property acquired two acre feet of water and moved it to the property for the commercial development. The two acre feet you are talking Page 13 of 16 about that normally has to be dedicated when you create a second lot by parcel map isn’t the same as the two acre feet that was put on the property for commercial use.

Commissioner Hafen

asks staff to address the issue.

Ms. Lee

stated that they both are correct. The code however doesn’t differentiate between residential dedications and commercial dedications. There is a requirement and procedure through the State Engineers office for Residential water rights and a procedure for dedication of commercial water rights. There are water rights that will be required for the new parcel satisfying the State water engineers office and NCC. Hamilton Reed, the State Water Engineer, is in agreement that water rights do need to be dedicated for the newly created parcel, and stated the permit if reinstated will need to be amended to include that parcel to share off that well.

Commissioner Hafen

stated the email in the back up from Mr. Reed, stated each lot will then have its own commercial water rights for a total of 4 acre feet in the well.

Mr. Richards

stated they have handled numerous commercial developments through the State Engineers office regarding how they calculate the water usage on a tract. It has nothing to do with the fact it is a newly created lot. They do a fixture count on the type of development going in there, like fixtures etcetera. All those things get added up and if they come to 1 acre or 5 acre feet that is what they apply for. They buy the water rights to that number and transfer them to the property. The same scenario will occur with this development as a whole. Commercial water rights are different than residential. That number is set at 2 acre feet per lot, but doesn’t apply to commercial. As a water rights surveyor and having dealt with the DWR this is how Commercial sites are done. The place of use was determined on the place of use map that is on record with the State.

Commissioner Carbone

stated on parcel number two is it possible the leach fields will be covered with a parking lot?

Mr. Richards

stated no it will be fenced off, in order to do development on the site a Site Development Plan will be submitted to Public Works and Planning for review.

Commissioner Carbone

stated then the only access will be on Gamebird.

Mr. Richards

stated no there is a shared entrance off Homestead that already exists.

Commissioner Carbone

asked what would happen if they property is sold off.

Mr. Richards

stated then the easement agreements come into play.

Commissioner Carbone

stated he thought it would have been done just so it would be complete so if someone bought it, the boundaries would already be done.

Mr. Richards

stated that is outside the scope of a Parcel map that would be the scope of a Development Plan.

Commissioner Carbone

stated but you are asking for approval of what you have here.

Commissioner Hafen

stated he doesn’t want to go against what the DWR is saying, would you be amenable for adding a special condition of approval that states that you will satisfy any and all requirements for dedication by the DWR.

Mr. Richards

stated that is already a law, so he doesn’t have a problem with putting that in. Page 14 of 16 Public comment opens at 8:50 pm and closed with no comment. Nate Lechtenberg, applicant, they have no problems satisfying requirements that DWR has for the property. They will fully comply with DWR and they want to make the property developable. The existing onsite septic system they aren’t going to develop the property so that the existing infrastructure will be unusable. The Site Development process will take care of making sure the existing infrastructure isn’t ruined.

Commissioner King

motioned to approve PM-13-0001 based on findings as shown on page 2 and subject to conditions of approval as written. Commissioner Earl seconds.

Mr. Osborne

stated after review it is about $2.35 to send out a notice. It won’t have a major impact on the budget to notice the additional owners.

Commissioner Hafen

stated if it becomes overly burdensome, time consuming or budget breaking to bring it back before the board. Commissioners direct staff to notice 30 parcels.

Commissioner Hafen

would like clarification whether or not all Parcel Maps under 5 acres require dedication of 2 acre feet annually and any other information that staff feels pertinent.

Commissioner King

asks if the parcel is within the Utility Inc service area.

Commissioner Kings

asks if the Division of Land Code require them to relinquish any water rights to the utility company as opposed to the State Engineer.

Commissioner Koenig

stated there is a letter from UICN stating they don’t have to because PEC designated that a well and septic property.