May 11, 2022

Commissioner Turner

states there is a Southern Nye County Summit Housing event by Professor from Reno speaking at the community center from 9 am - 4pm on Thursday and 9 am - 12:30 on Friday

Mr. Waggoner

stated he suggests going to that.

Mr. Waggoner

stated they are changing the evaluation of fees for building permits from 1997 to the 2018 evaluation fee. Section 2004-29 stated the County is to adopt the most current publication of the building construction cost status sheet, which is part of the building code part of the IBC. Effective July 1st of this year and then each year it'll be reviewed on July 1st and automatic adoption of the newest one. The code cycles every 3 years.

Mr. Waggoner

stated since April total planning application received were 180 which was 48 less than last month and total application processed were 143, which was 51 less than last month. New code complaints were 35 which was 6 more than last month and 7 complaints closed which was 7 less than last month. Since July 1st, there have been 1572 planning applications received and 274 new code complaints received. Compared to 1787 planning applications and 265 code compliance complaints for the same time last year. Since April, there were 45 SFR permits which was 20 less than last month and 5 MF permits which was 2 less than last month. Total permits issued all categories were 262 which was 32 less than last month and total inspections all categories were 472 which was 62 less than last month. Since July 1st, there have been 420 SFR permits so far compared to 409 SFR permits at the same point last year. Update on previous items heard by the PRPC was ZCMP-22-1 this item was heard by this board on the 3/9 agenda and was recommended for approval. This item was heard by the BOCC on the 4/19 agenda and after board discussion it was continued to the June 21 agenda. ZCMP-22-6 This item was heard by the RPC on the April 13th agenda and was recommended for denial. This application will be heard by the BOCC on 5/17 for final action. ZCMP-22-3: this item was heard by this commission on the April 13th agenda and recommended for approval. This item is scheduled to be heard by the BOCC on the May 17th agenda. We are currently working on a draft amendment to allow a temporary use permit for the sign review but not require it to be a public hearing application anymore, and it would put time limits on them. 7. a. For Possible Action – ZCMP-22-5: Public Hearing, discussion, and deliberation on an application for a (Conforming) Zone Change to change one (1) parcel totaling approximately 1.1 acres from Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to General Commercial (GC) on property located at 3760 E. Alfalfa Street. Assessor’s Parcel Number 042-451-08. 3760 E Alfalfa St Pahrump NV, LLC – Property Owner. Red Apple Fireworks – Applicant. Mark H. Fiorentino – Agent. (The Pahrump Regional Planning Commission Page 2 of 9 makes a recommendation on this item. Final Action by the Board of County Commissioners is scheduled for June 21, 2022, or as otherwise announced.) b. For Possible Action – WV-22-4: Public Hearing, discussion, and deliberation on a Waiver application to waive the requirements of Nye County Code Section 17.04.700.A(18)(b) to allow a permanent new warehouse for the storage of fireworks on property less than one thousand five hundred feet (1,500') from residential properties, located at 3760 E. Alfalfa Street. Assessor’s Parcel Number 042-451-08. 3760 E Alfalfa St Pahrump NV, LLC – Property Owner. Red Apple Fireworks – Applicant. Mark H. Fiorentino – Agent. (This item is Final Action by the Pahrump Regional Planning Commission unless appealed to the Board of County Commissioners, or as otherwise announced.) c. For Possible Action – CU-22-9: Public Hearing, discussion, and deliberation on an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a permanent new warehouse for the storage of fireworks on property located at 3760 E. Alfalfa Street. Assessor’s Parcel Number 042-451-08. 3760 E Alfalfa St Pahrump NV, LLC – Property Owner. Red Apple Fireworks – Applicant. Mark H. Fiorentino – Agent. (This item is Final Action by the Pahrump Regional Planning Commission unless appealed to the Board of County Commissioners, or as otherwise announced.) (SO) Steve Osborne stated Red Apple Fireworks added a 4th parcel, the previous 3 parcels did get approval for the zone change, waiver, and the conditional use permit. This is for the new proposed warehouse location. The conditions that they proposed are the same conditions as the other 3 parcels. They must submit a building permit application for the warehouse by August 1st, 2022, and other deadlines dates. The Board of County Commissioners meeting is going to be June 22nd, 2022, and based on the conditions, staff is recommending the approval of the 3 applications.

Commissioner Curtis

stated one of the special conditions is the zone change shall expire, if this zone change conforms to the master plan, even if they don’t build on it, why would we want to change it back?

Mr. Osborne

stated the reason we wanted to go back is its currently NC that's also conforming to the master plan. We generally don't want to have a zone change that increases the intensity in the possible uses on the property without having a project going forward.

Commissioner Curtis

asked if they want to relay a project to the zone change?

Mr. Osborne

stated yes, that’s correct.

Mr. Waggoner

stated in the past to not allow perspective zone changes to try to increase property values. In order to make sure it goes through proper review and through the proper channels, it's best to revert it back, so if somebody else wants to do some kind of GC type development on that property, it goes back through that review process.

Commissioner Curtis

stated she doesn’t understand the wording, it says start construction of the warehouse by September 1st or two weeks following the date of receiving building permits. What does that exactly mean?

Mr. Osborne

stated they must start construction by September 1st but if they don't get their building permits until after that date then it would be two weeks after getting their building permits.

Commissioner Curtis

asked do they get a penalty if they don’t start before September 1st?

Mr. Osborne

stated they must submit their building permit by August 1st. it’s hard to say when they will get their building permit, so whenever they get their permits, they will start construction to give them some flexible time.

Commissioner Tyler

stated if they submit by August 1st, we’re giving them some leeway. Page 3 of 9

Commissioner Turner

asked for this additional property, will it increase size of the proposed building already or be used for parking?

Mr. Waggoner

stated they plan on future expansions, right now in site development they have phase 1 and phase 2.

Commissioner Turner

asked for that phase 2, will it require parking or curbing on the 4th parcel?

Commissioner Curtis

asked Mr. Waggoner to explain why they can’t take sign down again?

Mr. Waggoner

stated the only sign that can’t be removed, which is a complicated issue, is the billboard sign that’s on the plaza property, it’s owned by somebody else, not the Plaza owner. Back when the Edwards Plaza was approved, that billboard was supposed to come down, but it's been battled back and forth in court and it’s just complicated.

Commissioner Curtis

stated there’s 3 signs out there

Mr. Waggoner

stated the other signs will come down.

Commissioner Curtis

stated she has concerns about Alfalfa Street, semi traffic. They have areas where semi’s will be unloading, and they will be very close to Alfalfa Street. Are you planning on the semi’s using that street, what’s going to restrict them from doing that?

Mr. Waggoner

stated the way the project is design is the trucks will be entering in and exiting onto the highway and there's driveways that go around to the loading dock area and then back out. The only thing Alfalfa Street will be allowed, I’m sure Public Works will be in on this, is for emergency access.

Commissioner Curtis

stated will there be no parking signs on Alfalfa streets? Tyler Mulvey stated currently there aren't any in any of the other areas for these emergency access, but it can be something to look at, right now it’s not on the plans.

Commissioner Curtis

stated it currently gets so busy with overflow parking. Tyler Mulvey stated that’s part of the reason for the 4th parcel, they added more parking.

Mr. Waggoner

stated there’s going to be adequate parking on site for this whole development.

Commissioner Curtis

stated she is concerned this will be a stash house, again.

Mr. Waggoner

stated it will not be a stash house. Mark Fiorentino, representing applicant, stated they are adding the 4th parcel and all of the conditions with it.

Commissioner Tyler

asked the applicant if they have read and understand and agree to the conditions of approval? Mark Fiorentino stated yes.

Mr. Osborne

stated the applicant is proposing to open a pawn shop at this location. Pawnshops requires GC zoning only. The code also requires a CUP, this would be a conforming zone change based on the master plan designation of community development area. This is an existing building, that’s approximately 12,000 sq ft. It was built in 1998, two story, already has paved parking for 45 vehicles. This is currently the adult superstore. Staff is recommending approval of both items based on the findings and the zone change will be heard by the board on June 22nd.

Commissioner Turner

stated his disclosure of transaction of this property years ago, but no current deal.

Mr. Waggoner

stated it would be nice to see that sign painted on the wall removed and something more conforming and nicer up there. Carolyn Walker, applicant, stated Dean Love Trust is no longer the owner and she and her husband own it now.

Commissioner Tyler

asked the applicant if they have read, understand and agree to the conditions of approval. Alexander Mackovski stated yes.

Mrs. Medici

stated this request is for an extension of time of CU-2021-000117. The CUP was approved by the RPC at its July 14th, 2021, meeting, with the condition that the applicant would submit and obtain approval of the site development plan within 12 months approval. The original expiration is July 14th, 2022. Due to delays and financial constraints encountered during the COVID-19 pandemic the applicant is requested an 8-month extension of time. Staff suggests a 6-month extension of time to submit and obtain an approved site development plan by January 14th, 2023, with construction to begin no later than January 14th, 2024. The Planning Commission must approve any modifications and approved conditional uses.

Commissioner Meredith

stated why do they need the extra 2 months?

Mrs. Medici

stated the applicant is in the audience and can answer that. Benjamin Torrella, applicant, stated they are trying to get an 8-month extension, we were engaged after the February 14th meeting, so I was pushing the owner to get all the consultants together and my understanding is the plan checking process almost 2-3 months so removing that time plus the time for design and submittal, I was trying to play is safe with scheduling to handle, we will do our best with the 6 months. I understand from the utilities and power it’s going to take time.

Commissioner Carbone

stated I thought I understood from the planner the issues were because of covid and other issues but what I’m hearing it sounds like more other issues, can someone elaborate?

Mr. Torrella

stated budget wise it’s covid. He’s talking about the 6 months your giving; I’d like to get 8 because of the plan checking process. Page 6 of 9

Mr. Waggoner

stated he understands the concerns with the time of approval for site development but that’s dictated more on your side, not the county side. Any delays of the construction side have nothing to do with the application.

Mr. Torrella

stated I understand what you are talking about. I’m just thinking of the sequence.

Mr. Waggoner

stated if you get your civil plans and building plans, that’s the full package to be submitted before you get your permits.

Commissioner Turner

asked MR. Torella if he is supplying civil plans for them?

Mr. Torella

stated they are doing the civil and structural plans for them.

Commissioner Tyler

asked the applicant if they have read, understand and agree to the conditions of approval?

Mrs. Medici

stated they will be adding this to the VR-20 Zoning. Under 17.04.240, permissive uses, under home occupations, keeping of chickens under the following conditions. The keeping of chickens shall be restricted to lots that are a minimum size of 20,000 gross square feet in size. 2) no more than 10 chicken hens will be allowed on each lot. 3) No Roosters shall be permitted. 4) Chicken coops shall be restricted to the rear yard area of the lot and meet the required setbacks for accessory structures and zoning review is required prior to construction. 5) No person shall be permitted to sell meat. 6) Persons or property engaged in keeping of chickens are not exempt from nuisance ordinances 7) All failed eggs must comply with the Nevada department of agricultural regulation. For the number 5, no person shall be permitted to sell meat, we did that on purpose so that no one is slaughtering chickens and has more than the required amount. Our intent was if they're going to use them for their personal use that's fine. No Roosters will be allowed. Within 17.04.910 zoning review required that's going to give you what your setbacks are going to be for the type of chicken coop that can be used. Anything over 200 sq ft would require building permit so that would be inspected by the building department and then they also double check to make sure the setbacks are being met.

Mr. Waggoner

stated he in RE-1 and RE-2 it allows for subsistence farming, which doesn't allow for any kind of commercial type operation. So, he would suggest adding that no person shall be permitted to sell meat and or eggs because they don't want a bunch of commercial businesses popping up on half acre type subdivisions and if we don't allow it in RE-1 and RE-2 why would we allow it in VR-20.

Commissioner Meredith

stated she doesn’t want to hinder people selling to their neighbors.

Mr. Waggoner

stated they don’t want commercial business in VR-20. It's subsistence farming, these are meant to provide eggs for their family. It doesn't mean they can't take him to a farmers’ market or something.

Commissioner Turner

stated regarding the setbacks, I understand it's going with the standard ones on the 5 ft back and set towards the back is closer to your neighbor. Then it becomes the neighbor’s problem especially Page 7 of 9 if they cut their house back a little further and have more of a front yard than backyard. Is there a way to maybe go at least 10 ft?

Mr. Waggoner

stated if you would like to make that as a suggestion you can.

Commissioner Turner

stated yes, I’d like to see that setback 10 ft at least.

Commissioner Tyler

asked for clarification in a VR-20, they don’t allow any other livestock other than chickens?

Mrs. Medici

stated that’s correct.

Mr. Waggoner

stated nor would this override any CCR’s if there were any that would apply to that subdivision. Like for instance we have a subdivision that was approved for a tentative map, for half acre lots. If they have in their CCR’s, you can't have this type of activity on the property that's perfectly their right to do that. We've had applicants before this board for chickens, had waiver application denied for it as well as the one we’ve been discussing for the last year. It's probably not going to be eliminated from it happening and even my neighborhood, but if we could regulate it a little bit, that's kind of what we're aiming to do rather than have code compliance cases all over the place.

Commissioner Meredith

stated she thinks this is fair for everyone and appreciates the draft that’s written up.

Commissioner Carbone

stated now animal control will be involved making sure they have only 10 chickens.

Mr. Waggoner

stated no, because it does not require a title 6 permit, animal control will only be involved if someone calls for a welfare check on the chickens. The number of chickens will fall under Code Compliance.

Commissioner Tyler

stated she likes there are guidelines for someone who wants to keep chickens rather than before when there was not. There have been complaints all across the board for chickens and rooster.

Mr. Waggoner

stated a suggestion is we can put a sunset provision in this code to give people that do have Roosters today in VR-20, a certain amount of time to come into compliance.

Commissioner Turner

stated he would like to make direction to staff to bring this back for next month’s agenda.

Mr. Waggoner

stated next month we should have a livestock ordinance that should address a BOCC agenda item with a nuisance complaint. Public Comment: