May 15, 2019

Commissioner Koenig

= Assessor Parcel Number = Building and Safety = Board of County Commissioners = Conditional Use Permit - District Attorney = General Commercial = High School = Manufactured Home = Neighborhood Commercial = Nye County Code = Nevada Revised Statues = Pahrump Regional Planning District = Public Works = Rural Density Residential = Right of Way = Regional Planning Commission = Single-Family Residential = Temporary Use Permit = Waiver = Zone Change Pledge of Allegiance/Call to Order Meeting called to order at 6:00 pm

Commissioner Lee

stated she turned in some minor typographical errors to staff.

Commissioner Duryea

motioned to approve. Seconded by Commissioner Thomas.

Commissioner Bennett

stated he will be resigning effective the end of June. Commission/Committee/Director Reports: a. BOCC Liaison Report - BOCC Liaison — John Koenig None. b. Director’s Report

Mr. Waggoner

stated total applications received in Planning was 209 which is 23 more than last month. Processed applications were 213, which was 37 more than last month. SFR count was 31 for the month and was half the total of last month. We saw our first MF permit in quite a while, MH was up 35 which was 16 more than last month. Total permits all categories was 231, an increase of 34 from last month. Total inspection 547 which was an increase of 134 for the month. For Code compliance we had 16 new complaints and closed 51. Previous items heard was ZC- 2018-000031 conforming zone change for hemp cultivation, MP and ZC on Bell vista for the manufacturing facility and indoor shooting range were all approved at the BOCC level. Ex Parte Communications and Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statements None. For Possible Action — AP-2019-000017: Discussion and deliberation regarding an Appeal of a decision made by the Zoning Administrator that the Planning Department is unable to process applications for an Extension of Time and Reconsideration of Conditions of Approval related to Special Use Permits for marijuana cultivation and production facilities due to the applicant failing to apply for an extension of time prior to the expiration of the Special Use Permits, and the zoning of the subject property having reverted to the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone which does not allow marijuana facilities. Located at 6041 S. Hafen Ranch Road, further described as a portion of Township 21 South, Range 54 East, Page 2 of 16 Section 15, File #84221, Parcel 1. Assessor Parcel Number 045-131-48. R Land Company, LLC — Property Owner. Nevada Natural Medicines, LLC / Scott Sibley, Manager — Applicant/Appellant. (This item is Final Action by the Pahrump Regional Planning Commission unless appealed to the Board of County Commissioners, or otherwise announced.) (SO) Steve Osborne stated the BOCC approved two special use permits in 2015 for this property. September 18, 2018 the board approved an Extension of Time for those permits. The ET was contingent on the facility being operational within 6 months. 6 months after that date was March 18, 2019, on that date the facility was not operational, there was no C of O and the facility was not being operated as a Marijuana facility. On that date the SUP’s expired, they became void 23 days after April 10, 2019 the applicant filed for an ET. Nye County Code 17.06.040 states any grantee of a SUP may request an extension of time prior to the expiration date. The application for the ET and the Reconsideration of Approval were rejected based upon the SUP was deemed to be expired and after the expiration date. The decision was made by the Zoning Administrator and the applicant has then filed an appeal of that decision. In staffs view it is clear the SUP’s were expired and the ET couldn’t be accepted since it was after the date specified by the board. There are three options for the RPC, you can affirm the decision, reverse or modify. Staff's recommendations are to affirm the decision of the Zoning Administrator.

Commissioner Lee

stated for clarification that this is for an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision and we are not revisiting the SUPs or the location of the Marijuana cultivation or productions. Ryan Welch representing Nevada Natural Medicines, stated he has provided an outline if they would like to see an outline of what he is going to say.

Commissioner Lee

stated they need a motion to include additional documentation.

Commissioner Curtis

motioned to accept additional documents.

Mr. Welch

stated is just an outline of what he is stating tonight. Seconded by Commissioner Thomas.

Mr. Welch

stated Scott Sibley is out of the country at a family reunion, so he is here representing the appeal. Mr. Welch read the document into the record as stated below: “They believe the ruling on the decision for the reconsideration of conditions RC-2019- 000002 dated April 16, 2019 from the Nye County Planning Department is improper. We received the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy on December 31, 2018, which according to Nye County you are allowed to be operational at that point. There were several punch list items we had with public works, as well as conflicting information from the Nye County Sheriff's Office regarding our Security Plans and if it was approved or not. These have all been complete and a new C of O has been issued. One of the punch list items from the Planning Department was the wall around the property. We currently have a block wall down Hafen Ranch and a third of the way down Thousandaire, with landscaping to improve the esthetics for the residents of Artesia, with the remaining portion being secured with a chain link fence. The Planning Department stated that the entire property needed to be a block wall and in reviewing the original hearing minutes from the County Commission meeting dated September 29, 2015, the final motion that passed didn't say "block wall,". In fact, most of the other cultivation facilities have chain linked fence or no fence at all. Originally, we planned to have a greenhouse at the back end of the property where the chain link fence currently is, Page 3 of 16 however, as technology has changed in the marijuana cultivation industry, all cultivation we do will be inside enclosed buildings. Thus, making the block wall around the entire property unnecessary as you would not be able to see any part of the cultivation process. On January 10, 2019, the State of Nevada Department of Taxation, Marijuana Division, came to the property and approved us to operate as a Production and Cultivation facility in the State of Nevada. The letters are attached to the staff report. Still pending the approval of Nye County, we've had multiple meetings with the County. On April 1, 2019, we met with the director of planning and a planning representative who stated the best thing to do would be to ask for a clarification of conditions and an extension of time. When asking about the extension of time the representatives from the County stated that as long as we got the extension of time and the reconsideration of conditions were in before the revocation hearing occurred our application would be acceptable. Another plan of action would also be to go into the revocation hearing with the wall being the only item that needed to be addressed. We decided the best route would be to apply for the reconsideration of conditions and the extension on time. At the April 1st meeting we asked for the forms to apply for the reconsideration of conditions and the extension on time, these forms were given to us by the Planning Department representatives. A few days later we turned in the forms and they were rejected stating we were not using the current forms. We then obtained the current forms from the Nye County website and turned in the reconsideration of conditions and the extension on time to the Nye County Planning Department. We believe the ruling on the decision for the extension of time ET-2019-000034 dated April 16, 2019 from the Nye County Planning Department is improper because other applications that have been turned in after the deadline are commonly accepted making this arbitrary and capricious. In fact, in May of 2017 we submitted a letter to request an extension of time for this application after the May 3, 2017 deadline and that extension was granted July 18, 2017. For this appeal they sent several contradicting emails regarding timelines to appeal the decision. An April 23rd Email from planning stated the deadline was May 1. We later received an email on April 25th that stated we had 10 days from April 16th making the deadline April 26th, which was the next day. They used the date the rejection letter was emailed, and the actual hardcopy letter was postmarked several days later. On April 30th, I received an email from the Director of planning saying I had missed the appeal deadline because I had not turned in my extension "which has since expired". Later that evening an email was sent from the Director of planning stating it was received by someone else in the office and on time. Based on the temporary C of O issued by Nye County on December 31, 2018 and the state issuing the letter to operate on January 28, 2019. It would appear all the conditions were met prior to the March deadline. Planning also sent several emails regarding the Security Plan not being approved by the Sheriff. The January 23, 2019 BOCC meeting the conditions for Nye County to approve the business license was "complete the fencing and recommendation of the Sheriff within 30 days." It's doesn't state block wall or approval of Sheriff. We have spent over $2,000,000 on improving this property to date and just obtained another building permit to complete additional improvements to the buildings. Page 4 of 16 We are asking this commission to approve the appeal, so we may ask the BOCC for any clarification and or extension, so planning will issue the business license.”

Commissioner Thomas

stated Mr. Welch had talked about a lot of activity occurring in 2019. The initial approval was in 2015. And asked what has been going on since 2015 and the end of 2018.

Mr. Welch

stated they had to get annexed into PUCI and it took years. They had to trench thousands of feet to tap into the Pahrump valley sewer and water, that took the most time. The big hold up is the block wall issue.

Commissioner Thomas

asked what inquiries have they done prior to January 1, 2019 about the block wall, specifically directed to Planning.

Mr. Welch

stated Scott has handled all of that, he doesn’t know. But it is completely fenced in around the entire 5 acres.

Mr. Waggoner

stated in regard to whether or not they can just arbitrarily change the block wall to a chain link fence over what was approved when the SUP was approved was April 1‘. They do have a fence installed as of yesterday, but it isn’t the block wall, nor has it been approved for the change of the fencing material.

Commissioner Thomas

stated Mr. Welch has made some allegations that the department has been ambiguous in giving contradicting response.

Mr. Waggoner

stated the only comment he can make is regarding the meeting he was part of on April 1“. It was an impromptu meeting where they showed up at the office pulled a staff member into the conference room and he went in there and he had no materials at the time. He was unaware that there was a stipulation in the code that they had to apply prior to the expiration. He does agree that there was discussion on doing the extensions of time but not realizing it was too late to do that. The rest is no more than allegations he doesn’t have anything to support that.

Commissioner Curtis

asked if the block wall is required by other facilities or is it sufficient having chain link.

Mr. Waggoner

stated some have both, but not being at the meeting in 2015, he understands there was quite a bit of protest from the residents in the Artesia subdivision. There were concerns of the elementary school down the road and that it could be viewed from the street and discussion on it not being viewable. It was put in the final action memo in 2015 when it was approved by the BOCC and up until recently it was the first he had heard they changed their plans. On the Site Development that was approved by Planning, Building and PW it shows a block wall and that hasn’t been amended until yesterday. Normal commercial activity it wouldn’t be an issue, but this one specifically asked for a block wall and they agreed to it and the plans even indicated that.

Commissioner Lee

stated regarding the Temp C of O and it was issued December 31, 2018 and only good until January 18, 2019. Stating that is only 18 days, did they feel they could get all the corrections done in the 18-day time frame.

Mr. Welch

stated he doesn’t know. He does have a C of O now and got the State of Nevada approval January 10". So, the big issue was that they were surprised of was the block wall, they reviewed the minutes afterwards and it doesn’t mention block wall and the memo did say block wall and they didn’t know that until recently when it all came down.

Commissioner Lee

stated the temp C of O was only good for 18 days, when you were coming up on the 18" day you didn’t think that was a red flag that maybe you should apply. She is looking at the Page 5 of 16 documents and what they are saying, and she is seeing multiple red flags. They were getting closer to the expiration date and asked at any time did this come up and think they should meet with Planning and see what options are and file for an extension of time?

Mr. Welch

stated he was unaware of the 18 days on the temporary.

Commissioner Duryea

stated at the December meeting he specifically asked Mr. Sibley if they were going to get everything completed within the 18 days and he assured him yes.

Mr. Welch

asked if the block wall is the only remaining issue, he believes everything was done at that time besides a few PW issues. The block wall was the main factor, by that time the facility was done.

Commissioner Lee

asked if prior to this instance they had applied for in a timely manner and received three previous extensions of time. It indicates that they are very well aware that there are expiration dates associated with this and time lines you have to adhere to and you were very well aware of them and established a pattern of behavior that you know them and have acknowledged them and adhered to them you have applied to ET’s previously. At some time, these red flags that kept showing up should have indicated to you that you need to go back to Planning department one more time and talk about your options to file for an extension of time. It is their responsibility as the owner of the privilege license, this SUP to keep track of these. Anytime you are in front of this board you are asked, have you read, do you understand, and do you agree to the conditions of approval. That is your time to say you haven’t read them, you aren’t sure can we have a five-minute recess to confer with staff, we grant those quite frequently. The BOCC does the same thing, we aren’t the final action on ET’s it goes on to the BOCC and you have a second time to say you don’t agree. You as the owner are responsible of this permit to maintain compliance and you know the expiration dates are coming it is your responsibility to file for those.

Mr. Welch

stated yeah. Public comment opened at 6:40 pm. Dwight Lilly stated this is an ongoing situation that started with a petition with over 500 names turned into the BOCC against the project. The public has watched several delays, and excuses on why the company can’t comply with the laws of Nevada and the BOCC requirements. Which we just heard again. This is a privilege license granted by the State of Nevada and the County operating a business such as a marijuana operation. With the past experience they have had with this company he doesn’t believe the company would stay within the bounds within marijuana licensing because they haven’t shown the ability and attempt to get open to begin with. At the appeal process it was told to them this is the last shot and they said they would comply. How many times are they going to be given waiver after waiver. Dave Stevens stated they should get them out of here right now.

Commissioner Lee

asked the applicant if they had anything additional to say.

Commissioner Duryea

motioned to affirm the decision by the zoning administrator. seconded by

Commissioner Lee

stated to the applicant they do have the option to appeal this to the BOCC and to talk with Planning on what the time frame is to do that. For possible action — CU-2019-000072: Public Hearing, discussion, deliberation and possible action on a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application for a Body Art (Tattoo) establishment located within the General Commercial (GC) zoning district on property located at 1360 E. Nevada Hwy. 372, Suite # 7 and further described as Parcel 1 of F#663390, Assessor Parcel Number 038-271-20. A&C Pahrump Capital, LLC — Property Owner. Cameron Batongbacal — Applicant. (This item is Final Action by the Pahrump Regional Planning Commission unless appealed to the Board of County Commissioners, or otherwise announced.) (CB)

Ms. Beeman

stated this applicant has a current CUP on PV Blvd and issued in 2011. There have been no code compliance issues or violations of code. The state does have regulations in place for body art and

Mr. Batongbacal

is asking to relocate to a new location. Staff recommends approval of the application.

Commissioner Lee

stated condition of approval #3 this is the first body decoration since the state adopted their new requirements. She asked for clarification if it is required to be done before opening or is there a grace period to do after it is open.

Ms. Beeman

stated she spoke with the State Health inspector and he will be required to get an inspection at the beginning and keep reports that will be turned over to the state health inspector each time it is inspected. Cameron Batongbacal, applicant stated he has been in business for 7 years and is very active in the community and wants to move to a better location to grow the business.

Commissioner Lee

asked Mr. Batongbacal if he has read, understood and agree to the conditions of approval.

Commissioner Tyler

motioned to approve CU-2019-000072. Seconded by Commissioner Curtis.

Mr. Osborne

stated the parcels are zoned GC and the code allows this in the zone with a CUP as long as the fireworks are 1500 feet from residential properties whether vacant or occupied. The nearest existing dwelling unit is 1775 feet on Fire Bird circle, but the residential zoned property is 388 feet from the subject property. They have been there since 2002 and the fireworks storage has been there since 2006, staff recommends approval of the waiver.

Commissioner Lee

stated for clarification code states the 1500 foot separation from residential zoned properties not specifically residential developed properties.

Mr. Osborne

stated it doesn’t specify developed, just residential zoned properties.

Commissioner Curtis

asked if the noticing circle encompasses a portion of the properties do they get a notice.

Mr. Osborne

stated yes. Tony Celeste, agent for the applicant they agree with all the conditions and one comment regarding the waiver is the vast majority of the Residential property has an over lay for commercial, he may be incorrect on that. There is a major highway and other commercial uses between them and the residential properties.

Mr. Celeste

understands their concerns and there are other federal guidelines that they have to follow and may even be more restrictive. He believes all notices have been sent to the property owners within the notification area.

Commissioner Lee

asked if these conditions of approval are the same conditions that have been requiring the previous fireworks stores to adhere to.

Commissioner Curtis

spoke in favor of condition # 16, they aren’t required to build on the subject property and can potentially move to a better zoned property.

Commissioner Duryea

motioned to approve CU-2019-000073 and WV-2019-000094 subject to the conditions of approval. Seconded by Commissioner Tyler.

Commissioner Thomas

asked if she has seen Mr. Morales’s objection letter, when was this promised to be made a park, does this device make noise, is there a smell that is created and is there any issues with what they are proposing to do for watering the sports fields.

Ms. Beeman

stated she can’t speak for Mr. Morales letter it appears he is talking about Discover Park rather than the HS. She defers to Mr. McRae to respond to the noise and smell question.

Commissioner Tyler

asked if it is treated irrigation water not effluent?

Ms. Beeman

stated it is effluent.

Commissioner Tyler

asked where it is coming from?

Mr. Waggoner

stated it is coming from the sewer treatment facility across the street. Cameron McRae transportation and maintenance operations manager for NCSD. This is the exact same water being used at the Lake View Golf Course and doesn’t produce any additional odor and is regulated by the state. They have their application in for a discharge permit already. The pumps won’t create any more noise then you are used to hearing off a HS property. The pumps are well off the exterior boards of the HS 41 acre property.

Mr. McRae

stated they will tie into the existing underground sprinkler system that already waters the three fields. There will be signs, restrictions on when they can and can’t water and they may change out the sprinkler heads to the purple heads for reclaimed water.

Commissioner Lee

asked if there is a limit on how much treated water they can receive.

Mr. McRae

stated yes. They will try to store at least one day of water in the tanks.

Commissioner Tyler

asked on the peak days how much do they irrigate a day.

Mr. McRae

stated on the hottest days as much as 45,000+ gallons a day for all three fields.

Commissioner Bennett

asked how much money they would be saving.

Mr. McRae

stated 10’s of thousands of dollars. They pay upwards of $8+ a gallon.

Commissioner Tyler

motioned to approve CU-2019-000074 with staff recommendations. Page 9 of 16 12. 13.

Commissioner Thomas

stated they haven’t asked them if they have read and understood the conditions.

Mr. McRae

stated he hasn’t been presented with the conditions but after informal conversations with staff he see’s no problem with agreeing to them. Seconded by Commissioner Thomas. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7). Yes: Beth Lee, Carol Curtis, Gary Bennett, Leah-Ann DeAnda, Pamela Tyler, Robert Thomas, III, Tom Duryea. For Possible Action — WV-2019-000095: Public Hearing, discussion and deliberation on an application for a Waiver from NCC 16.28.170.H.1 (Water Rights Relinquishment for Parcel Maps) to waive the requirement to transfer water rights to the State Engineer’s Office for the creation of an additional parcel of land via a Parcel Map, located at 961 W. Irene Street. Assessor Parcel Number 035-161-41. J.L. Investments, Inc. — Property Owner/Applicant. David A. Richards, Civilwise Services, Inc. — Agent. (This item is Final Action by the Pahrump Regional Planning Commission unless appealed to the Board of County Commissioners, or otherwise announced.) (SO)

Mr. Osborne

reviewed his staff report. Code requires a transfer of water rights to the State Engineers office, in this case it is zoned NC, by dividing the land there won’t be an additional residential dwelling unit. It has to go through site development when they want to start development and water rights will be addressed then. It was two parcels and in 2007 the owners merged the two parcels. This is going back to the original subdivision map of two separate parcels. Staff is recommending approval of the application. Dave Richards, agent for the applicant. He stated they agree with staff conclusions. It was combined because they wanted to build a church, there are already two wells and one would be on each parcel.

Commissioner Koenig

stated he doesn’t believe 1293A is applicable to this because it is NC and not zoned residential. In order to do anything on this property he has to show proof of water rights to use the wells to build a commercial property. You can’t have a commercial property and use a residential well.

Commissioner Lee

asked Mr. Richards if he has read, understood and agree to the conditions of approval.

Commissioner Duryea

motioned to approve WV-2019-000095 based upon findings and subject to the special conditions outlined in the staff report. Seconded by Commissioner Thomas.

Ms. Beeman

reviewed her staff report and staff recommends approval of the application. We received some letters of opposition that is included in the back up. Tony Elder applicant had nothing to add.

Commissioner Thomas

asked if he has seen the objection letter.

Mr. Waggoner

provided him with a copy of the letter in objection.

Mr. Elder

stated the direction copy on the signs doesn’t lead anyone down Grain Mill or Greystone. It takes them down Kellogg and then on Fox or back to Manse to Homestead then south to the Pleasant Valley project.

Commissioner Tyler

motioned to approve CU-2019-000075 and WV-2019-000096. Seconded by

Commissioner Koenig

asked why the addresses that are put in Google won’t come up with the correct location.

Mr. Foster

stated Google doesn’t accept our addressing layers. So, until they do it will never come up correct.

Commissioner Duryea

stated at the last meeting the Raceway was concerned with the timing, if this is approved will the timeline work for them.

Mr. Foster

stated he hasn’t spoken to them and they haven’t contacted him either. He stated he doesn’t send any letters out until the appeal process has passed which is another 30 days out.

Commissioner Lee

stated the Raceway was requesting 90 days. Public comment opened and closed at 7:35 PM with no comments.

Commissioner Tyler

stated the racetrack representative requested this to be moved forward expeditiously so they were able to move forward with Silverton’s permits with correct addressing.

Commissioner Tyler

motioned to approve AC-2019-000019. Seconded by Commissioner DeAnda.

Mr. Waggoner

stated this intent is to address the hangar as an accessory structure issue. The construction of a hangar is allowed now prior to the principal structure. The draft was sent to the association again and they want something added along the taxiways that would prevent obstructions over certain heights within 30 feet of the center line of the taxi way.

Commissioner Koenig

mentioned taxiway is misspelled in the document. Public comment opened and closed at 7:52 pm with no comments.

Commissioner Duryea

motioned to recommend approval to the BOCC. Seconded by Commissioner Bennett.

Commissioner Lee

stated staff was asking to continue to the next month’s meeting.

Mr. Waggoner

stated yes, the comments are minimal. Page 12 of 16 17,

Commissioner Koenig

asked if this will address the two- or three-legged sign issue.

Mr. Waggoner

stated yes. If the board has any comments he can try to address them before they see the next draft.

Commissioner Duryea

stated K-3 brightness it talks about incandescent lighting, no one uses incandescent lights because you can’t buy them. He suggests coming up with a different standard. Such as lumens, 54 watts is 810 lumens and 30 watts is 450 lumens.

Mr. Waggoner

stated that is a comment he received back from the ISA.

Commissioner Lee

asked if there will be any repercussions for sign contractors that continually violate the code.

Mr. Waggoner

stated yes, they are in the process of drafting Code Enforcement Provisions and these will refer to that. If there is a violation and they don’t correct it, and Code Enforcement has to correct it we do require them to reimburse the County before they get their sign back.

Commissioner Koenig

stated he has items he wants to sit down and discuss with Mr. Waggoner before it gets brought back.

Commissioner Tyler

motioned to continue TA-2019-000009 to the June meeting. Seconded by

Mr. Osborne

reviewed the recommendations by staff.

Commissioner Lee

told Mr. Lilly that he needs to limit his comments to the Lighting Ordinance that they are discussing.

Commissioner Koenig

stated on page 10 Item -S, Responsibility of County, who committed to that.

Mr. Waggoner

stated no one has yet.

Commissioner Duryea

motioned to recommend approval TA-2019-000010. Seconded by Commissioner Tyler.

Commissioner Thomas

stated on page 9 it references foot candles as far as lumens, and not what we discussed on the other ordinance as far as lumens. Shouldn’t we have the terminology consistent on lighting throughout all the ordinances. Page 13 of 16 18.

Mr. Waggoner

stated he doesn’t disagree, but if that is a suggestion he can look into it further if there is a conversion between the foot candles.

Commissioner Koenig

stated if they reference IESNA for urban services stations somewhere in there is what they use.

Commissioner Tyler

stated foot candles is a common measurement used in a variety of codes including building code and because it is a recognized measurement and you can buy devices that can measure foot candles at different heights, lumens are more a measurement equivalent to the wattage of the bulb. Kelvin is the temperature of the bulb, which is entirely different.

Commissioner Thomas

stated he voted no because the paragraphs under L & M refers to lumens and he sees an inconsistency. For Possible Action - PV Land Investments: Discussion, deliberation and possible direction to staff regarding the approximate 900 acres of property currently zoned Specific Plan (SP) that were covered by the now expired PV Land Investments, LLC Development Agreement. (CB)

Ms. Beeman

stated this was originally under a development agreement and we zone it under SP so we know where to look for their development code. In this case it has expired. We have had public inquiry on several of these properties. Staff is asking for guidance. Two of the parcels need to be removed, the properties between Eberhard and hacker that are colored purple have underwent a ZC of their own and no longer under the DA. We are only looking at the light green with heavy blue lines around it.

Commissioner Lee

asked if PV Land Investments show any interest in developing this land.

Ms. Beeman

stated they haven’t been in touch with us and all the land is owned by another entity.

Commissioner Koenig

stated it was all sold in the bankruptcy.

Commissioner Lee

asked for clarification that they could direct staff to rezone at our expense, or we could wait for potential developers to rezone.

Ms. Beeman

stated yes, but without guidance we don’t know what to tell them what type of MP there is out there.

Commissioner Koenig

asked what the current MP is out there?

Ms. Beeman

stated it is SP.

Commissioner Tyler

asked what the underlying zoning is without the SP.

Ms. Beeman

stated they are having a hard time finding that information out. They are still researching that. Much of it goes back to the Open Use zoning. Which allows for | single family residence per lot no matter what the size. Some are also highway frontage.

Commissioner Tyler

asked if the people who bought the property base their decision to buy based on the map that was provided to them as part of the SP.

Ms. Beeman

stated it went through bankruptcy court, so she can’t answer to that. Page 14 of 16

Commissioner Thomas

asked if the SP has expired shouldn’t it revert back?

Commissioner Lee

stated the DA expired and the MP and Zoning stays the same.

Ms. Beeman

stated yes, if it is OU and HF which is a zoning district we no longer have.

Commissioner Tyler

asked for clarification that a property owner will have to come and ask for zoning because there is nothing underlying.

Ms. Beeman

stated yes but if an application comes in we can’t say it is conforming to the MP, if it is an appropriate use for out there that isn’t in a utility tariff area.

Commissioner Lee

stated we can direct staff to study the area and to come back at a later meeting with a recommendation for MP and Zoning.

Commissioner Curtis

asked if the utility train they approved last year is in this area.

Ms. Beeman

stated it is north of this property. Public comment opened at 8:13 pm. Dwight Lilly speaking on behalf of the Private Well Owners Cooperative he is glad is that the DA is expired so it isn’t drawing more water out. He hopes who ever wants to develop there it allows for a bird sanctuary for it. They are concerned by the actions of the RPC that would affect domestic wells into the future. Their position with this board, the Water Board and the BOCC is that they want to work with them but to make sure they are making responsible decisions.

Commissioner Thomas

motioned to direct staff to come back within 60 days with a recommendation and the recommendation will specifically include comment on if order 1293A is sustained by the board.

Ms. Beeman

asked for clarification.

Commissioner Thomas

stated 1293A basically says they are going to stop development it creates issues for those who wish to develop and drill wells. Basically, as he reads it if that order is sustained it will in Pahrump Valley stop development until we come up with a solution.

Mr. Waggoner

stated for correction that it doesn’t stop development all it is doing is requiring water right relinquishment for domestic wells only, it has nothing to do with anything commercial.

Commissioner Thomas

stated the practical effect is that it is going to stop potential development because people can’t afford to purchase 3 water rights and hand 2 to the state engineer. We need to take a look at water because Mr. Lilly said water has been over allocated and we may want to zone it bird sanctuary, or highway we need to look at the future and water allocation. He wants staff to come back and say if 2193A is sustained is this going to be commercial and can it be developed at all.

Commissioner Duryea

motioned to direct staff to come back with a recommendation to zone the properties. Seconded by Commissioner Curtis.

Commissioner Thomas

stated his no is because from his perspective staff has to address water issues and failing to direct staff to address water issues perpetuates the problems we are in. Future__Meetings/Workshops: _Discussion__and__Direction Concerning Items for Future Meetings/Workshops; Set Date, Location and Time. Our next RPC meeting is June 12" at 6 pm.

Commissioner Lee

would like to have our next CIP meeting will be and get it placed on an agenda. She also asked if we can get chapter 4 for the Masterplan on an agenda.

Mr. Waggoner

stated we can put a place holder on for Chapter 4 for the next meeting.

Commissioner Curtis

stated in Cal-Nev-Ari someone in the CBD production is buying the water company from them, so they can probably have all the water they want to grow hemp.

Commissioner Tyler

stated they understand the issue with the water however they don’t necessarily go hand and hand. Just because we put something in a Master Plan doesn’t mean someone is going to get that zoning or that the property is going to be able to be developed. Looking at the plan doesn’t preclude us from halting the development if we don’t have water, we still need a plan regardless.