April 13, 2016

Commissioner Adams

stated on page 3 of 7, there are some words missing, he has spoken with Mr. Lacy.

Commissioner Carr

stated his name should be moved to the members absent section.

Commissioner Carbone

stated he spoke with Mr. Frye regarding the regulations. b. Capital Improvements Plan Advisory Committee - John Koenig The sub-committee is meeting 4/21 at 2 pm and the regular CIP meets at 4/28 at 2 pm.. c. Director’s Report None d. Chairman’s Comments Staff needs to verify that all members have met their requirements for OML training.

Mr. Osborne

stated staff was directed to review if there were deed restrictions for the Calvada Valley U5 area. It was determined that there were deed restrictions recorded in 1970 on the area, but have since expired. Horses were allowed for these lots, the original map shows equestrian paths through the subdivision also. One correction in the staff report, bullet point 3 states no expiration date for the deed restrictions and they were valid for 40 years from 1970. When zoning of RE-1 was put on the properties in 2007, the deed restrictions were still in effect and they didn’t expire till 2010.

Commissioner Adams

stated people bought land in that area with the understanding they could have horses. If a zoning change is made we are essentially taking value from that property in their eyes.

Mr. Sutton

stated local governments have the ability to zone how they see fit. Anytime there is a conflict between zoning and CC&Rs, zoning will always trump. The CC&Rs have expired, a group of people can get together and have a HOA and renew the CC&Rs if they wish to continue them. Page 2 of 8

Commissioner Hafen

stated the property owners that would have horses, would be grandfathered even if we moved forward with a zone change.

Commissioner Koenig

stated the problem is if someone bought the property wanting to have horses and the CC&Rs stated they can have horses.

Mr. Lacy

stated at this time they aren’t making any changes, we are just looking for direction for staff. We don’t have to go to SE we could stay with RE and limit the amount of horses or horses plus other animals. We are here because there was a specific property that had multiple animals on a 1 acre parcel that was causing flies, odors and other issues. The board can set limits on number of livestock.

Commissioner Clark

asked if there was a definitive answer on how many horses were intended in the CC&Rs or was it horses and other animals.

Mr. Lacy

stated there is no limit in the CC&Rs for livestock, our intent is to try and conform to the CC&Rs if possible.

Commissioner Clark

asked if the term horses would be used generically or be specific to a type of animal.

Commissioner Koenig

stated horses are stated specifically, who knows what they were thinking.

Commissioner King

stated in 1970 he suspects the sellers expected to see the properties built out as Ranchette homes.

Commissioner Koenig

stated the markup was done by the group that wants the change, not the board.

Commissioner Oscarson

asked how many horses Mr. Mazlo owns and how big his property is.

Mr. Mazlo

stated he has one horse and a little over an acre. Lynette Sandquist stated she is the problem property, her animals are taken care of, and her property is clean. Her neighbors are harassing her and lying about her. She stated she doesn’t have horses, she has goats, and a pig. Harold Sandquist stated his daughter Lynette takes care of all her animals and they have had animals for a long time. John Fesnock and Judy Fesnock read a letter into the record. They are asking to rezone a portion of the subdivision and to have a text amendment to include livestock in the SE zoning district. They are asking 279 lots be rezoned. Tracy Sandquist asked why we aren’t allowed to live like we used to. Why do we have to live to California’s standards? Her sister takes care of her animals. Nada Black stated they have lived in this area for 17 years, there are livestock in the area. It isn’t about if you can have animals but about how many. It may be too close to have lots of farm animals. This is a good community.

Commissioner Oscarson

stated it isn’t unreasonable to put a number on the amount of livestock they can have. We aren’t trying to take anything away but we should look at the cap for the particular zoning.

Commissioner Clark

stated if there is a problem in the area by one or two homeowners it is a problem for Animal Control. If there is a problem with the zoning ordinance where we want to restrict activities based on animal ownership that is a function of the BOCC not the RPC.

Commissioner King

stated most of us chose to live here in Pahrump. He agrees with Commissioner Oscarson that it might be time to entertain the number of animals on a 1 acre lot. We limit dogs and cats but we don’t limit livestock. Changing the zoning isn’t something he is amenable to.

Commissioner Adams

asked the applicants what the response was from Animal Control was.

Commissioner Koenig

stated when this first started Animal Control was here. They stated if we gave them permission to 5 – 10 dogs that they still wouldn’t grant anything from their end because of what the neighborhood claimed was happening.

Mr. Fesnock

stated animal control has tried in past and present residence to enforce rules. He understands that once the citation is signed it is passed to the DA’s office and they determine if it is worth their time. To this date that hasn’t happened. He stated the valley isn’t enforcing rules.

Commissioner Hafen

stated we are off topic. He doesn’t believe in doing a blanket zone change for the area. They are allowed to keep animals according to the CC&Rs and the zoning. If a group of individuals want to get together, file th3e application and pay the fees to have a zone change, he would be glad to consider that but won’t be taking away people’s rights to have animals.

Commissioner Hafen

motioned to direct staff to not move forward on the zone change. Seconded by

Mr. Lacy

stated the State of Nevada has been working on a State wide bicycle plan and have a Nye County plan they worked on when Cheryl Beeman was with the department. Some information might need to be updated. They have asked us to look at this at the RPC level and asked to take it to the BOCC with a formal recommendation. They have asked the BOCC to hear the item in May.

Commissioner Koenig

asked why they needed to hear the item in May. He would like to see what this cost the state, he would rather see 65 pages presentation on the pros and cons of stoplights versus traffic circles. He doesn’t know where we would get funding for something like this.

Commissioner Hafen

stated he has passed this around to other bicyclists, comments were that they are lacking some of the bike paths that are there, like on Manse road. They talk in the table about lack of bike paths to schools, but the map doesn’t suggest adding bike paths to and from schools. It would be important asset to the community to add bike paths to schools. One additional comment was more is better than what we have now.

Commissioner Koenig

stated as we fix roads we are doing bike paths, sidewalks and gutters, but not in all areas.

Commissioner Clark

asked where the money is coming from. We need to spend the money fixing roads before we build bike paths. Page 4 of 8

Commissioner King

stated the existing bicycle path on Homestead is in bad condition it has weeds growing over it, rocks and gravel on it. He has seen it being used but his concern is the underpowered scooters on the road.

Commissioner Koenig

stated he suggests to NDOT to get the bicycle paths on 160 and 372 first and then they would be interested in the rest of the plan.

Mr. Lacy

stated this is a planning document and there isn’t anything that is mandated in it.

Commissioner Adams

stated he and Cheryl Beeman worked on this, during the Master Plan Update. He stated in NCC 10.10 to move ATV/UTVs on bike paths and sides of the road and allow for limited access on county roads. He fully endorses this plan as it is. This is something we can take to the BOCC with some minor modifications.

Commissioner Adams

motions to recommend the plan to the BOCC. Seconded by Commissioner Oscarson.

Commissioner Hafen

stated he would like to see schools added to the recommendations.

Commissioner Adams

stated we could add an addendum to the plan.

Commissioner Koenig

stated NDOT should have been present if they wanted us to do anything with the plan.

Mr. Osborne

stated they took the Title 6 changes and added them into Title 17. One page 1 it states MME and that would need to be changed to Animal Establishments.

Commissioner Adams

stated on page 18 where we waive the maximum # of service animals, do we have a definition of trained service animals.

Mr. Osborne

stated that is straight out of Title 6, he isn’t aware.

Commissioner Adams

stated his definition of a trained service animals might be different than others.

Commissioner Hafen

stated there is an NRS that addresses that, not within NCC.

Commissioner Adams

asked if that goes to Search and Rescue.

Commissioner Hafen

stated he can’t answer that.

Commissioner Oscarson

stated the only animals that the ADA recognizes as service animals are dogs and miniature horses. Page 5 of 8

Commissioner Adams

stated he doesn’t think commercial breeder or commercial kennel should be a permissive use in RE-2. It should be a CUP or in a commercial zoning district.

Mr. Osborne

stated a Commercial Kennel does require a CUP.

Commissioner Adams

stated on page 25 it states it is permissive.

Mr. Osborne

stated on page 26 Commercial Kennel is a CUP.

Commissioner Hafen

motioned to recommend the changes to the BOCC for Title 17. Seconded by

Mr. Osborne

stated 6 lots are Master planned LDR and the additional are commercial. All 8 lots are zoned VR-8 and approximately 8,000 sq. ft. in size.

Commissioner King

stated the size of the lots were to be changed to GC would they not be too small.

Mr. Osborne

stated the minimum lot size 20,000 sq. ft. and NC is 5,000 Sq. Ft.

Commissioner King

stated NCC requires those lots fronting Hwy 160 to have a cross access easement. Giving up 30 feet for a cross access easement there won’t be any room to develop anything. Unless all the parcels were joined together in a Merger-Resub. The other issue is there is no direct access from Hwy 160 because Boothill is there and there is access from Samba lane. NCC also requires a 6ft block wall to block commercial from residential lots.

Commissioner Clark

asked who came up with this request.

Commissioner Adams

asked if once combined and zone changed, would they be facing Hwy 160 or Samba Lane. Michael Lach stated the access would be off of Samba Lane. This is the only area that was left residential off a highway. This was a scrivener’s error. Two of those properties are commercial and that is spot zoning. If someone wanted to group three of those properties together they could do that. One property has a billboard on it.

Commissioner Koenig

stated that is a Murphy property and the properties are all zoned VR-8 the Masterplan is Commercial for those two.

Mr. Lacy

stated we would have to change the Masterplan also.

Commissioner Koenig

stated we don’t have time to do this as free. Do we have an official request to rezone? Page 6 of 8

Mr. Lacy

stated Mr. Lach can only rezone those lots he owns. That is why we brought this to you, if it is something that needs to be fixed because it was an error then you can direct us to do it. There are multiple owners. It would be considered spot zoning unless we do all 8 lots.

Commissioner Koenig

stated if he wants to rezone he can apply properly for it. He believes that staff is too busy and we should be getting paid to do these things.

Commissioner Hafen

asked if the properties to the East side of the Highway are LI as are the properties directly to the North and South.

Commissioner Adams

stated there was a daycare center on Winery that went to the BOCC and the neighbors didn’t want it. If this was NC they could do anything they want. These properties could access off of Hwy 160. If they all were combined they could have access off Boothill.

Mr. Lach

stated all the lots to the north are the same size, as are the ones across the highway. He asked what the minimum acreage is for LI.

Mr. Osborne

stated he believed a half acre.

Mr. Lach

stated those aren’t even close.

Commissioner King

stated those were legally created lots. If we were to change the zoning on these lots we are talking about they would be illegal lots. Those are already legal nonconforming lots.

Mr. Lach

stated they fit in NC.

Commissioner King

stated getting the NDOT approval would be hard to get. Since 2001 the zoning code requires a 6ft block wall to separate the residential lots from the commercial lots. It might not be like that everywhere but new development has to do that.

Commissioner Adams

asked if this would be amended to NC.

Mr. Lach

stated that is what he wanted.

Commissioner Adams

directed staff concerning the possibility of rezoning 8 lots from VR to NC. Seconded by Commissioner Oscarson.

Commissioner Carbone

asked if they will be doing it on our cost. They are already over budget already.

Commissioner Koenig

stated that is what they wanted.

Commissioner Oscarson

would like to see something brought back to put a cap on livestock for a future meeting. Page 7 of 8

Commissioner Koenig

stated he would rather do that after he is off the board.

Commissioner Adams

stated he hears from the community that there needs to be limits set.

Commissioner Clark

stated dogs and cats aren’t the same thing as livestock. Anyone can have a dog or cat, it is difficult to see how a horse fits into a quarter acre lot. He doesn’t believe this is the particular venue to decide that issue that is the BOCC.

Commissioner Koenig

stated there has been a request to not pay the RPC members, and he wants the DA’s office to look into whether or not we can legally not pay the members the $40 they receive now. They are trying to save money. He directs staff to bring that back on the next meeting.

Mr. Sutton

stated the meeting in May the entire DA’s office will be in a conference and unavailable for the meeting.