February 11, 2026

Mrs. Sandoval

stated Planning applications for the month of December, total applications received were 173, which was 8 more than last month. Total applications processed was 97, which was 14 less than last month. Planning applications for the month of January, total applications received were 216, which was 43 more than last month. Total applications processed was 143, which was 46 more than last month. Since January 1st 2025 to December 31, 2025 there have been 2,508 planning applications and 736 new code complaints received. Compared to January 1st, 2024, to December 31, 2024, total applications were 2.339 planning applications, and 547 Code compliance complaints received. Code compliance: new complaints for December 2025 was 70, which is 19 more than last month, closed cases were 59, which is 3 less than last month. Total active complaints through December 31, 2025, are 456. Code compliance: new complaints for January 2026 was 69, which is 1 less than last month, closed cases were 42, which is 17 less than last month. Total active complaints through December 31, 2025, are 461. Building permits for December for SFR was 13, which was 3 less than last month, MF (multi-family) was 2 which was the same as last month, commercial was 11 which is 4 more than last month. The total permits issued in all categories was 106, which was the same as last month. Total inspections were 399 which was 62 more than last month. Building permits for January for SFR was 19, which was 6 more than last month, MF (multi-family) was 0 which was 2 less than last month, commercial was 12 which is 1 more than last month. The total permits issued in all categories was 113, which was 7 more than last month. Total inspections were 393 which was 6 less than last month. Update on previous items heard by the RPC, ZCMP-25-13 was a Minor Master Plan amendment from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Community Development Area (CDA) and was approved ZCMP-25-14 was a zone change from VR-20 to General Commercial 9GC) on a parcel totaling .46 aces, located at 2361 S Mallard Ave. The RPC heard the item at the December 10, 2025 RPC meeting and was voted on 7 – 0 to recommened approval to the BOCC. The item was heard at the 1/15/26 BOCC meeting and it was approved 5 – 0. Page 2 of 9 Sitting as the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee

Commissioner Hayden

asked did we resolve the differences?

Mr. Osborne

stated they resolved the landscaping they are going to ahead and meet the requirements, and as far as the roadway we believe they are going to be able to come up with a solution with Public Works.

Commissioner Tyler

asked the applicant if they have read, understand, and agree with the conditions as written in the staff report? Page 3 of 9

Mrs. Medici

reviewed the staff report stating that this is an application for 11 new street names for Final Subdivision Map LD-25-14. Staff reviewed the application, map, proposed names, and External Comments and found that the names meet the criteria set forth in NCC 15.24 and recommend approval. Paulo Chavez stated he has no issues with the names.

Commissioner Tyler

asked have you read, understand, and agree to the conditions as written in the staff report?

Mrs. Medici

reviewed the staff report stating that this is an application to request to abandon approximately 1,746 linear feet of right of way along Bulter Street, in order to facilitate the consolidation of parcels for a proposed tentative map. Upon review of the application staff finds sufficient justification to recommend approval. External comments were received and ATT Requests the following 10” PUE adjacent to all roadways; 10’ PUE centered on all interior and rear lot lines throughout the proposed subdivision and this was added to the conditions. Blayne Soule stated he is with Dwyer Engineering and represents the owners of these two properties. He explained the areas that they are requesting to be abandoned for the future project.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked what is the purpose of the abandonment?

Mr. Soule

stated they have a tentative map that is in review and this is part of the mapping process.

Commissioner Tyler

asked the applicant if they have read, understand, and agree with the conditions as written in the staff report? Page 4 of 9

Commissioner Hayden

asked about the fencing and the privacy slates vs the cloth?

Mrs. Marshall

stated it would be the maintenance required for both.

Commissioner Kerr

asked about the permissible use for this property, and how it is determined what will fall under needing a CUP?

Mr. Osborne

stated if a use is not specifically listed then the zoning administrator can make a determination if it is permissible or not. In this case we determined it would be a conditional use permit.

Commissioner Kerr

asked about the fencing and the overview said chain-link with slates was not permissible but then in the backup it said it could be used.

Mrs. Marshall

stated that is what the waiver is for to be able to use the slats.

Mr. Osborne

stated the code states chain-link with slats does not constitute acceptable screening for this type of use.

Commissioner O’Brien

asked Mr. Osborne if they approve this application with a waiver and they increase the operations on the lot who will control this? What ends up happening is these items get approved and we have no control down the road. Page 5 of 9

Mr. Osborne

stated they can always make the argument that it has been allowed previously but we take items on a case by case basis. Zhelyazko Georgiev stated on this project he has a pre-approved loan and the thing is I am not against following the code, but it is too expensive, I am asking for a possible solution by submitting this waiver.

Commissioner Hayden

asked you are going to build the structure, but you do not want to enclose it with any kind of protection?

Mr. Georgiev

stated he can do a chain-link fence with the cloth or slates, and he will gravel the lot.

Commissioner Hayden

asked about the paving and what part of the property he is planning to pave?

Mr. Georgiev

stated the entry and the building will have concrete, the rest will be gravel.

Commissioner Hayden

asked on the drawing, there are trees was that an error?

Mr. Georgiev

stated no, we would like to do Desert landscaping.

Commissioner Bohanon

asked what is the maximum amount of trucks you will be having here?

Commissioner Kerr

asked Tyler Mulvey can you tell us about chipseal as an option? Tyler Mulvey stated we allow chipseal, but it cracks and breaks and defeats the purpose, otherwise type 2 but you have to water it all the time or it is going to create dust.

Commissioner Kerr

asked can we take the waiver as separate items?

Commissioner Tyler

asked the applicant if they have read, understand and agree to the conditions as written in the staff report?

Mrs. Marshall

reviewed the staff report stating that this is an application requesting a Waiver of the Nye County Development Standards from live landscape and required watering systems and landscape buffer to include landscaping/tree watering systems and to allow an advertising video screen. Upon review of this application staff finds sufficient justification to recommend Denial of WV-25-20 as the applicant has not provided sufficient hardship for the waiver request.

Commissioner Kerr

asked if they can use artificial turf as part of the landscaping plan?

Mr. Osborne

stated yes, you can use artificial turf but not in lieu of the living plant requirement.

Commissioner Kerr

asked if this development includes any buildings? If not the only reason they would need water would be for the landscaping.

Mrs. Marshall

stated that is correct, however they would need some type of fire prevention on the site.

Commissioner Tyler

stated that this is an electric charging station and it is not acceptable to use water so I am not sure how that would work. Bill Cookston stated if approved the client agrees to all the standard and special conditions. The issue here is water, he does not mind landscaping just not any plants that need to have water. If they had to bring the water to this location it is around fifteen thousand dollars. The screen they are proposing is about the size of a 55’ screen. They owner are willing to pave and do the landscaping just with no water.

Commissioner Tyler

asked what is the purpose of the screen?

Mr. Cookston

stated it is for advertising.

Commissioner Kerr

asked the request for a waiver is not to remove all live plants but to remove plants that require water?

Mr. Cookston

stated yes, the big issue is the tree that would require water.

Commissioner Ewing

stated for these charging stations they normally are like a park atmosphere with grass where someone might be able to walk there dog.

Mr. Cookston

stated he can bring that up with the owners, but they have no plans for a dog area.

Commissioner Simunick

asked staff if there any tree alternatives that they can choose from?

Mr. Osborne

stated they are allowed to have decorative gravel rocks and boulders.

Mr. Cookston

stated they are not opposed to landscaping with decorative rocks and things like that they are just trying to get away from water.

Commissioner O’

Brien stated they are trying to conserve water in our valley, and trying to build business in our valley. Is there any way we can approve some landscaping that would be acceptable for this project that does not require water.

Mr. Osborne

stated all that can be done is to waive the living plant requirement but then require rock and boulders for the landscaping. Page 7 of 9

Commissioner Tyler

stated the main thing we would need to waive is the requirement for the tree, there are live plants on the list that do not require water.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated he likes the idea of zero water usage and making sure we have some sort of replacement to make this work with rock structures. We are really talking about 1 tree due to the 25 parking spaces. He is going to make the assumption that the tree would provide shading for the cars while charging.

Commissioner Tyler

stated they may want to add some sort of shade structure down the road, she is not thrilled about the water being around high voltage electricity. The 1 tree is not going to provide enough shade for the cars.

Mrs. Marshall

reviewed the staff report stating that this is an application for a twelve-month extension of ZCMP- 22-16 for a conforming zone change to change 1 parcel from Open Space to Suburban Estates to allow the construction of a single-family residence. Previously approved extensions were due to no availability of water. In discussions with Great Basin Water Co. there are now utilities in this area. Upon review of the application staff finds sufficient justification to recommend denial of ETSU-25-8.

Commissioner Kerr

asked when was the first time we knew that water was available?

Mrs. Marshall

stated within the last 6 months, they are currently servicing homes within the area.

Commissioner O’Brien

asked staff going back to open use does not prevent them from having a home again correct?

Mrs. Marshall

stated they would have to go through the zone change again. Edgar Montalvo stated when he first got this lot they had the goal for our son to have his home here. He is an architect and we decided we can do the rezone for this lot. We recently contacted Great Basin and they gave us the great news that they are ready to develop these lots. We are ready to start the project we have been in contact with the building and planning departments. We already have the plans since 2023, now that we can get water service we will start the geotechnical part of the process. If this extension is granted we will start the process right away.

Commissioner Kerr

stated the back-up actually shows expiration in 1 year if this is approved, is that enough time?

Mr. Montalvo

stated he is not sure if that will be enough time.

Commissioner Tyler

stated this would be all of the permits pulled within 1 year, not to do with the construction.

Mr. Montalvo

stated then yes that should be enough time but 18 months would be better.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated he is more comfortable with 18 months instead of a year. Staff is recommending denial so we need to find alternate findings. Page 8 of 9