September 9, 2015

Commissioner King

motioned to approve. Seconded by Commissioner Carr.

Commissioner Adams

asked why we are defining a casita.

Commissioner Koenig

stated because a member of the public asked for a definition of casita.

Commissioner Hafen

stated a permissive use in some zoning districts allow for a guest residence not to exceed 1500 sq. ft. would this conflict with that being that it is only 600 sq. ft.

Mr. Osborne

stated he believed the intent would be to replace guest residence with casita. It would be a 600 sq. ft. site built home instead. Page 2 of 8

Commissioner Koenig

stated they aren’t going there yet, that might be the next step.

Commissioner Adams

stated his concern was that we would have the same term, but two different definitions.

Commissioner King

stated usually a casita is attached or semi-attached to a main residence, they aren’t necessarily a guest residence or guest room.

Commissioner Oscarson

asked if they could remove temporary guests, keep in stick built and limited to 600 sq. ft.

Commissioner Clark

motioned to recommend to the BOCC the definition of Casita as proposed.

Commissioner Hafen

asked for clarification if the motion was for the definition as written, with temporary included.

Mr. Osborne

reviewed his staff report.

Commissioner Koenig

asked if they do this will they need to put a meter on their well.

Mr. Osborne

stated yes, under NRS 534.180 it states if you have a domestic well and a SFR that is served by that domestic well and if you add a second or accessory dwelling unit on the property the owner of the domestic well is required to install a meter on the well.

Commissioner Koenig

stated under #1, under D it doesn’t mention recreational vehicles. He felt D should be removed all together. Farmers have to renew every 2 years, and watchman quarters are annually. They should both be 2 years.

Commissioner Hafen

asked why guest residence is included in a TUP.

Mr. Osborne

stated the idea was to have a casita, which is site built. If you wanted something more temporary or moveable like a park model RV that is something that should require a TUP so you can renew it and to keep track of the unit and the status of it. Page 3 of 8

Commissioner King

asked if current code allows for a RV to be used a temporary living.

Mr. Osborne

stated no you can’t use an RV as a guest residence. You can under watchman’s quarters, farming or ranching during dwelling construction you can.

Commissioner King

stated so now we are creating a new definition of temporary guest residence.

Mr. Lacy

stated the current code allows it under medical hardship.

Commissioner Koenig

read an email from Dwight Lily into the record and Mr. Lilly is opposed to the text amendment. Amy Nelson stated she has 1 acre, has her own well and her family comes out to visit and bring their RV’s to stay on her property. She has a problem with them having to pay to stay on her property, and it could be longer than what the county has described as temporary.

Commissioner Adams

asked if they would be staying longer than 6 months. You are allowed to have an RV on their property while they are building.

Ms. Nelson

stated they would stay on her property, and it could take 6 months or more.

Commissioner Adams

stated you have 6 months that they would be able to stay on her property with no permits. Bob Howard stated if you were building a home it was only 2 years in the past they could be on the property. You can’t have guests living in 600 sq. ft. it shouldn’t be a temporary use. Guest Residences shouldn’t be included in as a temporary use.

Mr. Lacy

stated we are trying to work within the state regulations that apply to wells and septic tanks that only allow one SFR per lot, which goes along with our zoning code that only allows for one SFR per lot. We have a majority of public that have been coming to our office wanting to use a manufactured home or park model for a temporary use on a lot used for a SFR. Under federal HUD guidelines it defines a manufactured/mobile home as a SFR.

Commissioner Koenig

asked Mr. Sutton if RV’s aren’t included in section D but they are included in section 1. Does this mean they aren’t included?

Mr. Sutton

stated if it isn’t listed in D, the only allowable structures are what are listed under that section.

Commissioner Adams

asked if the changes in the TUP will it affect the 1500 sq. ft. guest houses that are allowable in other zoning districts.

Mr. Lacy

stated this reads it is for manufactured homes. Commercial coaches, or RV’s to be used for temporary use only. There is a different section of the code that allows stick built guest residences up to 1500 sq. ft. as a permanent install. Page 4 of 8

Commissioner Clark

asked staff what would happen if a TUP isn’t renewed and it has expired.

Mr. Lacy

stated it would fall into our standard code compliance process but the sub-committee talked about options like a bond to pay for removal to remove the temporary install.

Commissioner Clark

asked if there have been any complaints from neighbors that have been converted from a TUP status to a rental. Are there thoughts on assessing new impact fees if they are using the mobile home as a rental?

Mr. Lacy

stated the direction from State Manufactured Housing that we can’t use a mobile home as a guest residence is very recent, we are trying to get our codes to deal with the issue. 80% of the requests seem to be mobile homes to use as a guest residence. You could assess impact fees but it isn’t a legal use of the property. It would require a zone change to multi family.

Commissioner Hafen

motioned to recommend the TUP revised language with the following changes. Under 1A – change from annual renewal fee to a 2 year renewal with a renewal fee and to delete section D. Seconded by Commissioner Oscarson.

Mr. Osborne

reviewed his staff report. Under current code the Multi-pet permit tier 1, which allows 6-10 dogs is a permissive use in the RE-1, RE-2 and SE zones. This proposal removes them as a permissive use and would make them subject to a CUP.

Commissioner Hafen

asked if there are any other zones that the Multi-pet permit tier 1 is permissive.

Mr. Osborne

stated in the RH-4.5 and RH-9.5, and not permissive at all in the VR zones.

Commissioner Carr

asked if the Multi-permit tier 1 also includes cats into that number.

Commissioner Oscarson

asked if livestock is permitted in these zoning districts, and if there was a limit.

Commissioner Koenig

stated yes livestock is permitted, there is no limit but we aren’t addressing that issue tonight.

Commissioner Adams

asked what the provisions are for revoking the SUP or CUP on the Tier 1 or Tier 2.

Commissioner Koenig

stated unless animal control pulls their permit, nothing is done. Page 5 of 8

Mr. Lacy

stated if they violate a condition of approval we could have a show cause hearing to revoke the CUP. It won’t be based on neighbors moving in next door not wanting the dogs.

Commissioner Hafen

motioned to recommend the amended language presented by staff to the BOCC. Seconded by Commissioner Carr.

Commissioner Koenig

stated we deal with land, this doesn’t belong under the RPC. Under C – it should state that they are allowed to fill up, charge batteries etcetera at their office locations. Under E1 it states they have to provide a designated route that is asking too much. Item #2 states they shall not be stationary for longer than 1 hour, if they have to set up and hit the lunch crowds that doesn’t give them enough time. Item B they shouldn’t have to provide a site plan. Item #4 states they have to apply for a CUP if they want to operate along Hwy 160, that is a little over the top.

Commissioner King

stated there is an individual that sells tools out of his truck, he does the same thing these vendors do. Will this all apply to him?

Ms. Lee

stated not necessarily, we do have several mobile service providers.

Commissioner Carr

stated if we don’t have a health department how are we going to guarantee that the food is safe.

Ms. Lee

stated those that already have business licenses have submitted certificates of compliance from the State Health Department for the unit during the year that it is annually renewed.

Commissioner Carbone

stated vendors might say they have permission to be on property but there might be some that haven’t gotten permission, he doesn’t believe BLM would give permission for Page 6 of 8 them to be on their property. We need to make sure that we know where the vendors are, it is our job to maintain health and safety.

Commissioner King

stated there is nothing in our code that addresses health and safety, that isn’t our job.

Commissioner Carbone

stated the reason this came before you is because there was an option for a CUP requirement.

Commissioner Koenig

stated the Town of Pahrump controls business licenses, they should have control of this.

Mr. Sutton

stated NRS 278.020 Zoning Statutes, gives the overall principles as to why we do planning and states for the purpose of promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community, the governing bodies of cities and counties are authorized and empowered to regulate and restrict the improvement of land and to control the location and soundness of structures. This is the prevue of the board, it is a broad statement but that has been his determination.

Commissioner Clark

would like to create a sub-committee to review the language and invite Peter and Jeanne to attend and provide their thoughts. For Item #4 requiring a CUP, could we have that under a staff approval instead of coming to the RPC?

Commissioner Hafen

stated he agrees with the comments, there are some things that should be removed. The RPC needs to discuss and maybe address the different zoning categories between commercial and residential. A CUP for in front of residential development may need some sort of restrictions. It is a good idea to have the application part of the Town Business license.

Ms. Lee

stated the Town of Pahrump will not issue a Business License unless and until applicants come to the Planning Department and gain approval of a Business License Review, where we check the zoning and they do have to provide us with a copy of the Health Certificate and other documentation.

Commissioner Hafen

asked for clarification that they already come through Planning for approval.

Ms. Lee

stated yes, there are 6 that have come through business licensing. The code doesn’t address this, staff wasn’t sure how to handle them, there has to be a right location and a right place for them. As we have gotten more applicants our internal procedure has changed.

Commissioner King

motions to create a sub-committee to review and bring back to the RPC, with the assistance of Mr. Ellis and Ms. Wright. Seconded by Commissioner Clark.

Commissioner Koenig

stated the subcommittee will consist of Commissioner Clark,

Commissioner Oscarson

, Commissioner Koenig, Ms. Wright and Mr. Ellis.

Commissioner Koenig

would like brought to the next meeting Multi-pet permit I, and Tier II in VR, SE, and RE zoning districts.

Mr. Lacy

stated the utility easement can be your 5 foot setback also, if there is s 10 foot utility easement then there is a 10 foot setback. Amy Nelson, CASA having an event this Saturday help children in the county that are placed in foster homes.