March 12, 2025

Commissioner Tyler

stated she nominates Commissioner Simunick, seconded by Commissioner Hayden.

Commissioner Tyler

asked Commissioner Simunick if she would agree to it.

Commissioner Hayden

asked the District Attorney’s Office if she has a legal position regarding if this vote should be continued or tabled. Michelle Nelson stated no, any accusation stated today is the first she has heard of them she has not heard both sides and has no opinion either way.

Commissioner Lee

, states she submitted some minor typographical errors to staff, these changes have no bearing on the minutes.

Commissioner Lee

asked for reminder if this was continued due to Public Works working on the road abandonment. Steve Osborne stated it was going to change what the setback would be depending on the right of way, but now they have determined that the shade cloth fabric is not a building, so it would not have to meet any setbacks. A waiver is not needed.

Commissioner Hayden

asked if there is an HOA?

Mrs. Medici

reviewed her staff report stating the billboard is non-conforming to the adopted 2023 masterplan update and we recommended denial of the reconsideration of conditions.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated the applicant mentions they have had the billboard on the submittals, which is true. Is there any mention at that time that this would need to be removed?

Mrs. Medici

stated she is not familiar with that. Brian Hardy, representing the applicant stated this billboard has been there for a significant amount of time, it is grandfathered on the property. If you look back at the masterplan on page 21 it identifies signs where it talks about signage and billboards and acknowledges business signs are important extension of commercial development. The billboard they are talking about today is in a commercial zone not residential. They believe the Page 4 of 13 billboard should be able to remain on the property as it was part of our original plans that were submitted. His client is okay with the condition on the billboard that they are happy to mitigate a cumulative visual effect of billboards through appropriate design standards, policy number 1 says to encourage more attractive signs. They are willing to comply with that and paint the sign and landscape around the bottom of the sign as well as lighting which will be energy efficient. They are happy to accept those additional conditions so that we can upgrade the sign to be consistent with policy number 1 of the masterplan instead of policy number 5 which is removal of the sign.

Commissioner Lee

stated at the October 2nd meeting Richard Sheehan was asked if he read and understood the conditions of approval and that was the time to say I do not agree with this condition.

Mr. Hardy

stated Mr. Seehan did not understand, there was some confusion, and he acknowledges that was a mistake on his part.

Commissioner Tyler

asked what exactly do you intend to do with this sign because currently it’s an off-premise sign, so it advertises someone else’s business.

Mr. Hardy

stated right now it advertises a local attorney and Pink Box.

Commissioner Tyler

asked if the reason they want to leave the sign is to continue to get revenue from the sign is that correct?

Commissioner O’Brien

stated the 2023 Masterplan specifically states to us as a board and directs us in matters of improving the aesthetics appearance of Pahrump. The building you are putting here is going to be a great improvement. He thinks the billboard will detract from that. This board is directed to maintain and look at property and how it is developed.

Mr. Hardy

stated they plan to comply with the masterplan.

Commissioner Lee

stated she thinks it would also be prudent to review the process for which these go through. This will go through site development which is when everything is reviewed and implemented. They would have been told at that point in time that the billboard would have to come down. Their conceptual plan showed what is existing, it doesn’t mean that it is in accordance with code.

Mr. Hardy

stated his clients are not trying to say they had the rug pulled out from under them, that is why they are here today to see if we go ahead and make sure everyone is on the same page.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated what keeps sticking out in his mind is the Masterplan. According to NDOT, existing outdoor advertising in natural landscape setting has a negative effect on the visual quality of the state’s highways. You mentioned that you were looking into doing landscaping, is that on any of the plans?

Mr. Hardy

stated they are at a conceptual plan right now, but that would be a condition we would accept.

Mr. Hardy

stated one item he wanted to bring up was special condition #7 which states applicant will remove billboard, they would like that condition removed. They are in the process of removing the containers from the property. They also desire to develop the adjacent property as well and continue the growth in this area.

Commissioner Hayden

asked if they are willing to do the same conditions with this sign?

Commissioner Lee

asked if they are willing to bring these up to current sign codes?

Mrs. Sandoval

stated the billboard that it is referencing to be removed, is the same billboard on the previous item. It isn’t the billboard on the other parcel, it is referencing the item we just heard.

Commissioner O’Brien

, the post of the billboard current on the property in question, within the boundary?

Mr. Hardy

stated it is.

Commissioner O’Brien

asked if the post could be used to create your sign for the development and then remove the billboard from the top.

Mr. Hardy

stated he does not know, he would assume that could be a possibility but would need to speak with the engineer. I think the intent as business owners would appreciate the revenue from the billboard.

Mrs. Sandoval

stated as the billboard sits now, it does not meet current setback requirements for code.

Mr. Hardy

stated this sign is grandfathered and the reason it is being considered for removal is because of the new changes that are being done on the property. Our preference would be to use the existing use for the billboard.

Commissioner Tyler

stated they have certain boundaries as a planning commission to work with and stay within.

Mr. Hardy

stated he fully understand that process.

Commissioner Lee

stated they upheld the condition of approval on the previous item.

Ms. Nelson

stated for clarification for the record when the board and applicant refer to the previous item it is number 9 on the agenda.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated he is concerned with the well head just downhill, if there is any spillage or issues from that standpoint and what provisions are being considered at this point in time. Scott Brudette stated this is a future pad for future development that would come in and fully submit plans for the tanks which would have to go through EPA to be considered.

Commissioner O’Brien

stated the wellhead serves all of Mountain Falls and future development for Thousandaire, Manse, CAAS road. They get serviced from this well, from the tank and possibly an additional tank alongside it. That wellhead is now serving over 3000 lots soon to be great more quantity. His concern is in the design of this property will there be some kind of containment considered for run off the slope, people spill fuel when filling up their vehicles, especially when it rains, he would like to see in site development that staff look into containment for the runoff. Page 6 of 13

Mr. Hardy

stated they will take that into consideration.

Commissioner Lee

stated under number #1 the general finding the applicant stated it will provide residence who newly development western expansion of Pahrump with amenities, are you just referring to west of the subject property?

Mr. Hardy

stated this development is going to have multiple phases. This is going to be one of those phases that they think will be incorporated into a larger project and will be able to serve people who come in and out of Pahrump. There is residential going in across the street.

Commissioner Lee

asked Mr. Hardy if they understood and agree to the terms of the conditions of approval.

Mr. Hardy

stated they understand all the conditions of approval.

Mr. Brudette

stated it should also be noted they are considering a quick service restaurant, the application was submitted for both uses. The future lease of this pad could be one or the other. The other part they can do a drainage condition so it can be contained on site.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked if it could be both?

Mr. Brudette

stated they can have a C-store that sells food inside of it, or you can have a drive through that just sells food.

Commissioner Lee

asked if they have fuel companies or quick serve foods that they’re in discussion with currently or that they have tentative options with?

Mr. Hardy

stated he cannot speak on any ongoing negotiations. He thinks they are more likely to see a quick serve situation, and cannot make any commitments to that.

Commissioner O’Brien

asked if they could add a special condition regarding the fuel and containment of all spillages to remain on site, if they did choose the restaurant they would not have to worry about the condition.

Mr. Hardy

stated they would agree to that.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated if it is going to be a fuel he would like it to in front of the water board.

Mr. Hardy

stated they would agree to those conditions.

Commissioner Lee

asked staff if during the site development process this becomes a fuel dispensing facility who goes over the onsite containment or is that at the state level?

Mr. Osborne

stated Public Works reviews the drainage. Page 7 of 13

Mr. Mulvey

stated they will look at drainage, but it hasn’t gotten as far as contamination of other fluids besides stormwater.

Commissioner Lee

stated if they add that condition, she wants to make sure they have the proper method to make sure they adhere to it.

Mr. Mulvey

stated if it is a condition, it can be added to the drainage study, but the normal study doesn’t cover things like that.

Commissioner O’Brien

stated he would like to see them make this into a food establishment as an anchor for future development rather than put fuel there because of the water issues. It would make a difference to him on whether or not they can force the ability to contain any spillage on site so it can be properly removed.

Commissioner Tyler

stated if it were QSR then it is going to have to have a grease interceptor and that can also contaminate water just as well as anything else, unfortunately it is not in our purview to totally restrict them to one type or the other, all we can do is put in conditions to give the community peace of mind.

Commissioner O’Brien

stated or to deny it completely.

Commissioner Tyler

stated if they are going to deny it they need to find alternate findings.

Commissioner Lee

stated she understands the concerns with a fuel dispensing facility, this application is for a CUP for a fuel dispensing facility, they can either approve it or deny with alternate findings. If they go the route of a restaurant a CUP is not needed.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated what is unclear to him if they want it to go to the Water Board, do they table it, it goes to the Water Board and then come back to them.

Commissioner Lee

stated it is a process issue and asked the DA if they want the Water Board input they would continue the item, item is heard by the Water Board and then comes back to the RPC, is that the procedure.

Ms. Nelson

stated if there are no time constraints on this application then the board can do that.

Mr. Hardy

stated he was speaking with Director Osborne and there is no need for a CUP for a fast food restaurant with a drive thru, he was discussing that they can withdraw without prejudice for fuel and change to fast food. His client would like to withdraw without prejudice.

Ms. Nelson

asked Director Osborne if the application does withdrawal is there a time limit if they need to re- apply for the CUP for a fuel dispensing facility?

Mr. Osborne

stated no there is not.

Mrs. Medici

reviewed her staff report stating this is for 5 new street names for Phase I of the Indian Road Subdivision. They have been reviewed by all departments for compliance.

Mrs. Sandoval

reviewed the staff report stating this is a conforming zone change to allow the property owner to utilize the property for his crane sales and rental business. Staff finds sufficient justification to recommend approval of the zone change. Future expansion will require additional approvals from the Planning Department.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated special conditions number 5 shows October 21, 2025, is that supposed to be October 12, 2025?

Mrs. Sandoval

stated yes, it is. John Rafacz stated he is the owner of Crane West Services.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked if the crane sales will be here and Vegas or just here. It will just be storage of the cranes here.

Mr. Rafacz

stated just here. Major repairs will be done in Vegas.

Commissioner Lee

asked Mr. Rafacz if he agrees to the conditions of approval?

Mr. Rafacz

stated he agrees. We have containers that are currently all being moved and a fence will be placed around the parcel.

Commissioner Simunick

stated on the Nye County GIS it shows this parcel is already zoned CM.

Mrs. Sandoval

stated, correct. In 2020 he did go through with a zone change but he was unable to meet the conditions of approval so his zone change expired. He is very close to finishing his approval of the SD. The Assessor’s Office and the expiration are just not synced yet.

Mr. Rafacz

stated they just have the rear fence to finish. They have containers back there they are moving on the 16th and finish the fence.

Commissioner O’Brien

stated in our Masterplan 2023, Bell Vista is listed as a gateway to Pahrump is it your intentions to put a privacy fence around the property, so that it is more appealing to the public.

Mr. Rafacz

stated yes where the ugly items will be there will be screening. Page 9 of 13 Motion: recommend approval of ZCMP-24-22 to the BOCC, with the correction for the October date, Action: Approve, Moved by Tim Bohannon, Seconded by Pamela Tyler, Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6). Yes: Beth Lee, Debra Hayden, Faith Simunick, John O’Brien, Pamela Tyler, Tim Bohannon.

Mrs. Medici

reviewed her staff report stating this is for a 3400 sq ft gas station and convenience store. It also proposes a 3720 sq ft fuel canopy, 1200 sq ft car wash, and a 2200 sq ft quick service restaurant. This is the old Bank of America property. The ATM machines will be relocated during the SD process. The property was used as a gas station prior to the construction of the Valley Bank/Bank of America Building in 1980. It was utilized as a bank building for around 45 years. Staff finds sufficient justification to recommend approval of the application.

Commissioner Lee

asked if the applicant on the phone or in the audience, was she told she had to be here for the application?

Mrs. Medici

stated no. She was told to be here for the meeting.

Commissioner Hayden

asked for clarification on the quick serve restaurant, will it be like a Mavrik or a Burger King.

Mr. Mulvey

stated the definition can be pretty broad but generally a fast-food establishment.

Commissioner O’Brien

asked if they know if they are going to vacate one of the drives off 372? They said they are going to allow McDonald’s drive to continue. But if they develop the entire property he would like to see one vacated because it is an accident issue.

Mrs. Medici

stated they are in talks with NDOT to make sure the entrances are compliant. There has been discussion to extend out Frontage Road further into the property.

Mr. Mulvey

stated part of the predevelopment meeting was to extend the sidewalk that exists at McDonald’s towards this development. And the acreage condition was to square up the ROW to provide clean full access for County ROW to NDOT ROW.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked if Frontage Road is going to be extended.

Mr. Mulvey

stated the .6 acres is where their existing asphalt is. It is to make it all part of our right of way, instead of having part of Frontage Road on their property.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated he has significant concerns with the water.

Commissioner Lee

stated there are a lot of things they need to have conversations with the application about and she would like to hear from the Water Board. So they can deny, and they can re-apply, or we can continue it and have them attend the water board. John Koenig stated they should consider continuing and making sure the applicant is here.

Mrs. Medici

reviewed the staff report stating the use requires an approved CUP in the GC zoning district. The first CUP expired due to the SD not being submitted by the deadline. The project will be reviewed under Site Development by the Technical Review Committee. Staff finds sufficient justification to recommend approval of the application.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked for clarification on smoke bombs. Kristian Paananen stated he brought a few pictures so people can understand what the smoke bombs are, they do not explode pretty much smoke emitters that get used in special effect or pictures. They are about the size of a red bull can and omit smoke from it. Just because it has pyrotechnics it is the same storage as fireworks.

Commissioner O’Brien

asked if they sell to the public?

Mr. Paananen

stated it is strictly wholesale distribution, we have no retail.

Commissioner Lee

asked Mr. Paananen if he has read, understands and agrees to the conditions in the staff report.

Commissioner Bohanon

asked what from a fire safety standpoint is being done for that? Scott Burdette stated it will be a full fire sprinkler system to meet the demand of the product, with a full alarm system.

Commissioner O’Brien

asked if there will be any containers outside for storage?

Mr. Burdette

stated currently there is but this application is to design the warehouse so the containers can be removed.

Commissioner O’Brien

asked Public Works what about the unnamed road, is there any intentions of developing that and would we require the property owner to give up the easement or are we going to abandon it?

Mr. Mulvey

stated not that he is aware of there are no plans or need for it.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated special condition number 7, it states that the applicant will have 4 years to remove the containers. Why would it be so long or is that long enough?

Mrs. Medici

stated the timeframe is consistent with what we have required for the fireworks businesses.

Mrs. Sandoval

stated she has a couple comments from Commissioner Koenig. On page 2 under D for secretary/clerk we are going to remove where it states” Director of Planning or their designee”, and that should state the secretary/clerk shall instead. Also remove in the same paragraph, “assure the proper indexing of all commission documents as public records”, that is handled in the Planning department. On page 5 under subsection G, where it says “at public and private functions”, we are adding after social media platforms and “the use of private emails”. On page 10 under B1 there is an extra “the” we will remove.

Commissioner Hayden

stated she did not get the booklet for all the rules before the first meeting and she would like to get it in advance, it should be made available prior to a meeting, she was not informed of the open meeting law training requirements. She gets the agenda 3 days prior, and would like more time. Minutes are only kept for 1 year, is that long enough?

Mrs. Sandoval

stated to address the booklet, it is provided as soon as you are appointed. NRS states 3 working days posting for the agenda and you do get them 4 working days before, we cannot provide them to you before the public. Regarding the minutes the minutes are always posted online, this actual number 3 is for the verbatim minutes, which if there are contentious items, that is the only time the Planning Department will create verbatim minutes. We have all the minutes saved, and prior to when we had actual tape recordings those are backed up on our Tyler content manager. The training is handled through Administration, and it is required for the first year then even year after that.

Commissioner O’Brien

stated he would like to address this to John Koenig to have BOCC to look into enacting a law to look into abatement procedures, some kind of enforcement schedule or fine schedule for abatement of abandoned properties. We cannot find hydrants on half of the streets because they are under tumbleweeds.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated as a reminder there is open meeting law training this week and next. Page 12 of 13