Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'll turn my mic on that should help Comments by the general public. Pursuant to NRS 241, this time is devoted to comments by the general public, if any, and discussion of those comments. No action may be taken upon a matter raised under this item on the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included on a successive agenda and identified to be an action item. Is there anyone that has anything they'd like to discuss that is not specifically on the agenda tonight? Okay, we're going to move on. Notice of the appeal process. Anyone agreed by an action of this Planning Commission may appeal such decision to the Elko County Board of County Commissioners within 10 calendar days of said action. An appeal form may be obtained from the Division of Planning and Zoning located at 540 Court Street, Suite 11. 104 in Elko when completed return the appeal form with the required $250 filing fee to the division of planning and zoning within the 10 calendar day period Okay, we got the legal stuff out of the way now, let's get down to business approval of minutes Any questions on the minutes?

Yeah, Mr. Chair, I just want to note that on page three, line 13, there's a Scrivener's error. I believe that's supposed to be withdrawn instead of with Ron. So 13. Yeah. Other than that, I have no comments.

All right. Anybody else have any questions on the minutes? Can I get a motion?

Mr. Chair, I motion to accept the Planning Commission meetings for Thursday, April 16th, 2026. Including the corrections. Oh, including the corrections. Thank you, Colleen.

I will second that motion.

Okay, we have a... A motion to approve April's meeting minutes. A motion by Commissioner Gaworski, and a second by Commissioner Rosch. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Abstentions? I'm in favor, motion carries. We have no preliminary hearings, so we're going to jump into public hearings. Our first hearing is application COZ26-003, Jimmy and Kelly Faulkner. Corey?

Jake, if you want to help. Really quick. Sorry, I'll need to abstain from this one, as I work for the City of Elko. The water department or the water fund pays for part of my salary.

OK. That's been noted.

OK. An application submitted by Jimmy and Kelly Faulkner requesting a change of zoning from a light industrial district to an agricultural residential and portions of it, only portions of it are going to be agricultural residential. For uses consistent with an AR zoning district Location is APN 0 0 6 3 2 H 0 2 3 being a portion of parcel 4 as shown on the record of survey for Betty Reed bear revocable living trust filed in the office of the Elko County recorder on August 11th 2014 is file number 6 8 9 1 2 2 being a parcel being a portion of land situated in a portion of the Northeast quarter section 30 Township 35 North Range 56 East Mount Diablo Basin Meridian County of Elko state of Nevada There is the whole parcel right here is currently zoned light industrial there is a conditional use permit for billboards that parcel so they can't change that portion because otherwise a conditional use permit would go away so it's just as six acres little over six acres or a little over six and a half acres to be rezoned agricultural residential the city was opposed to it the applicant his representative myself and representatives of the city did meet the other day and I do believe that that we came upon an agreement. Jim Kerr with the City of Elko Water Department is here to speak. But I'll go through my staff, my recommended conditions, and then there's an addendum to these conditions also. So staff recommends approval with the following conditions and restrictions. At the time of development, the developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of Nevada Revised Statutes, Elko County Code development criteria, and all local building and development requirements pertaining to agricultural residential properties and light industrial properties. If said property is sold in whole or otherwise conveyed to a new owner or owners, The deed of conveyance shall contain verbiage that identifies and adopts the recommendations, findings, conditions, and requirements of approval of this specific zone change. Three, any access from Frontage Road 454 East Idaho Street or Old US Highway 40 shall be coordinated and permitted through the Nevada Department of Transportation. Four, the 6.84 more or less acre parcel to be zoned agricultural residential shall not be further subdivided. And I will add in there that there will need to be a note on the parcel map stating that as well. Five, any installation of a residential septic system shall be located a minimum of 400 feet from city of Elko well number 43 measured to the closest point of the septic system. 6. The applicant developer shall connect to the City of Elko water system or enter into a formal agreement releasing the City of Elko from any liability concerning a new residential well being drilled on APN 00632 Hotel 023. 7. No livestock shall be kept within 400 feet of the City of Elko well number 43. And that concludes my

conditions Okay any Commissioner questions of Cory Cory just a couple things to make sure I'm understanding You right, and I've I've got some more general questions But for the 400 feet to the well is that 400 feet to the wellhead or to the wellhead yes, okay? So it is the wellhead And I'm assuming there's no other municipal water supply in this area. I mean, it's outside the city.

Well, that's why that one condition in there, the potential is there for him to connect to the city water system house, which I feel would benefit the applicant for several different reasons. One, there are concerns that when the city does use that well, it would render that residential well at least temporarily inoperable, if not permanently. And so that's why there's also that if they are going to drill an individual well, they'll need to enter into an agreement with the city to not hold them liable for if their well dries up. And that being said, also I want to make it clear that the priority date for the city of Elko's well is quite a bit older date than this new well would be. And so I doubt there would be any liability there to begin with, but let's enter into this agreement regardless.

And the one other question I'm sort of curious about is why this didn't come up in the applications, but it's because nobody was talking about domestic well, because there was no residential.

Primarily so. And also, it would be really hard, I feel, for this board to justify denying this application. Because of the well and or the septic system because the county does not regulate or permit either one of those in a change of zoning does not guarantee You know it's not a guarantee that they'd be able to have a well or septic So that that would be just one concern. I'd like this board to think about if they're Wanting to deny this application

I'm just more worried about the, or more concerned about the background, because there was a series of rapid changes in a relatively short period.

Yeah, and it just wasn't on people's radar back then like it is today. Okay, thank you. The city's in the process of working on a new wellhead, updating their wellhead protection plan, so all this stuff is right at the forefront of everybody's minds, including the county's. Okay, thank you.

Naomi, you got any questions?

No, I'm good.

Okay. So access to this is going to be through the light industrial on the frontage.

That's correct, yes.

Okay. And then the subdivision, I'm sorry, go ahead.

When they do the parcel map, well, Bob brought up, there might already be a dedicated right-of-way going through there, but if there isn't, I'll look into that tomorrow, if there isn't, then the surveyor will have to create an access easement on his parcel map.

So right now this is all one parcel? That's correct, yes. Okay. Then the condition to restrict further subdividing would be specific to the AR piece? That's correct, yes. And that means max one septic on that.

Right. Right. Which is exactly what we're trying to accomplish with that.

Okay. All right. Scott, you got anything else?

Yeah. I'm just thinking now, if we go to the northeast side of that property, are we running into any problem with septic systems on that end?

We we those septic cysts that area up there has not come anywhere near close Density counts.

Okay.

Thank you Okay, is there anyone that would like to represent this application please come forward Thank You mr. Chairman planning Commission members for the record Bob Tebow of high desert engineering and I sign in. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, here on behalf of the applicant, Mr. Jimmy Faulkner, who is also present. And I think Corey did a good job of summarizing some things there for you. And we are aware of those conditions. The applicant is in agreement with those conditions. And as Corey mentioned, we did hold a very productive meeting with the city just yesterday. Myself, the applicant, Corey, and a handful of city staff members. I think we've come to some good compromise. We understand that we have the opportunity or the choice when we do develop that residential piece to either drill a well or connect to the city system. We're going to weigh those costs and see what works best. Mr. Faulkner does currently have a home just north of this. You can see it there, the green parcel just north of this is his home. He does have a residential well there. Some years ago, it did dry up. It was only, I think, about 100 feet deep or so. Is that accurate? And he and the city shared costs to deepen that well. And so he does understand those concerns with the neighboring well. And he does understand that if he does drill another well, he would have to drill it at least as deep as the new well that they did.

Was that, what, 10 years ago or so? How long has that been? It's been like a 240.

It's done really well.

And how long has that been?

Since they built the well down there, the new well. Has it been 10 years, 20 years? Yeah, it's been 10 years. So it's been about 10 years. He's had a well at 250 feet deep. But he has not had any problems with that new well. And so that's his intention, if we choose to go the well route, to do a similar situation. Because he understands those those concerns and conflicts with it with the city well As far as the septic and staying 400 feet from the existing well, that's no problem That's a really large parcel of 400 feet just comes into the bottom quarter of that partial or so And so that's not an issue what you did ask about the access would it come from Idaho Street? Probably not you can see if we were to zoom in on that. That's a Lance Street Lance Street comes in there off Idaho Street and into those residential parcels. That was a street that was dedicated with the Meadow Valley Ranchos for subdivision that you see across the freeway. I'm not sure if there's some debate as to whether that street still goes all the way through to the freeway or if it was vacated. There's some conflicting information to this point, but we'll get to the bottom of that. either extend an access easement on our parcel this one we're trying to develop here or we'll just use that Lance Street if it does in fact exist so so if we use Lance Street there won't be the need for any additional and

I can't answer to that. More than likely, I'm going to guess that encroachment probably would suffice for him, but that's going to be a question that NDOT's going to have to answer.

So Lance Street is not, that's not developed at this point, is what you're saying?

It's just a gravel road going in there. I don't know what that encroachment onto the highway looks like, and that's why I can't speak for Department of Transportation.

Is that developed? The encroachment's made it. The rows paved? Yeah, the encroachment's all paved.

Oh, okay.

Jimmy says, off mic, the encroachment's all paved, for the record.

Okay.

Okay.

And he maintains the road.

Okay. All right, anything else, Bob? I don't think so. Any questions of... Thank you. Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak on this? Please come forward and sign in and state your name for us.

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. My name is Jim Kerr. I'm the Utilities Director for the City of Elko. I just want to point out a couple things. First of all, so that well is one of our largest wells in the city. It does not run all the time right now, but the cone of depression on that well is very large. When that well does pump, it can pump up to 3,000 gallons a minute, so it pulls a lot. As the city grows, we're going to have to pump that well more. So that's going to be a concern in the future. I just want to point a couple of these things out before we go on. This parcel does sit within our two-year capture zone. So... That's one of the reasons why we're concerned about any septics and things like that. Nitrates can be very, very harmful to drinking water, so we want to make sure we keep as many of those out as possible. So that being said, we have, to us, it would make more sense if they would just connect to the city of Elko water. We already have it right there. I think it would be pretty simple. I don't think it would cost as much as a well, as a personal well in that area. Let's see, what else? We are happy with the 400 feet. At least that would keep... The septic would, it's going to take longer for those nitrates and solution to pollution is dilution. So it would help with that issue as well. And the other issue is the concern of livestock in that area. So we'd like to keep livestock away from our wellhead as well. I can answer any questions moving forward?

So you're good with the 400 feet?

The city's good with the 400 feet.

And I guess the issue with the well, the potential disadvantage of him drilling a well doesn't affect you as much as you're going to affect him.

Absolutely. My, my opinion, I think we would, we would affect him in the future. Um, and just, we are going to have to start pumping that well. Some of the development, um, that I see coming across on my desk is, uh, It's going to be pretty extensive in the city of Elko moving forward, and I think we're going to need a lot more water. Okay.

Just a quick question. So there's a possibility of hooking up to the water, but there's not one for hooking up to the sanitary sewer, correct?

The closest sewer is at the U Center Road. Okay. So it would be a long run. Okay. And then, of course, there would probably have to be some kind of a booster lift station type design in order to get the sewage to our facility. Okay. Thank you.

What kind of cost is incurred, you know, ballpark to hook up water to the city? I have an idea on wells. I don't know what it costs to.

Well, it depends on what has to be done, right? We would definitely want... the main to extend across the alley bear right away from our well, across that alley bear right away, and at least get the main in front of their parcel. It's hard to see up there, but to get that in front of their parcel and then tap onto the main from there and run it up. So depends on where they decide to put their house. But I would say you're probably, 60 feet or more to get the main across there maybe 80 i didn't go out there and wheel it and it's been a while since i've been out in that area but um um i'm not sure on construction costs or it all depends on which contractor you get right you might get a contractor that's more money than another one but uh i wouldn't think it would be as much as a well

Well, and then once they, so I'm assuming that that cost would fall on their shoulders to come out of the city main. What about once that is completed? Is there a place where? I know if you guys are working in front of my house in the city, then from my main out to the street is city, and from my box or meter out to my house is me. So at what point is he going to be responsible in the future for maintenance of that?

So he would be responsible from the meter pit We'll set the meter pit at the property line.

Okay.

Right? And so he'll be responsible from the meter pit to the house.

Okay.

We would be responsible from the main to the meter pit.

Okay. And that meter pit would be in front of his property, most likely?

Yeah. Okay. The closer he sets it to us, the more responsibility. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay.

Thank you. And I'm sure we would have to go through, correct me if I'm wrong, Bob, but I'm sure we would have to go through some kind of... right of ways and situations to where we would be able to put a main in there. All right.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kerr.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else that would like to speak on this application? All right. I'm going to close public comment. Any commissioner comments and or a motion?

Let's see if I get this right. Mr. Chair, I move to approve the change in zoning from LI to AR for C0Z26-003 with all the staff's revised findings, recommendations, and conclusions.

Are your recommendations Yeah, they're including that that must hook to city water.

Yeah, that's what I remember revised Okay, but yeah with the addendum. Okay, I guess to be clear Although saying that I'm wondering if we need to get a final ruling on the quorum issue first just to have it on the record Okay, okay We have a

Motion do we have a problem?

I also feel like we need to make sure we're clarifying what what we're asking of them for seconding.

Yeah, yeah I'll withdraw the motion and just be clear mr. Tebow.

I don't mean to create confusion Complication here, but did I hear someone say there's a requirement that we must connect to the city water system well?

I did say that so I'm not exactly clear than what Corey can you sure Condition again, okay?

the applicant developers shall connect to the city of Elko water system or enter into a formal agreement releasing the city of Elko from any liability and Concerning a new residential well being drilled on APM 0 0 6 3 2 hotel 0 2 3 Okay, okay, thank you

Okay, so you want me to try again? Let's go again.

Yeah, go ahead.

Mr. Chair, I move to approve change of zoning application C0Z26-003 from light industrial to AR and light industrial with all the staff's findings, conditions, and recommendations, including the addendum added this evening.

I will second that motion.

Okay, we have Mr. Gavorski with a motion to move forward with this, and a second from Commissioner Roche. We have one abstention, but we're gonna go ahead and vote. All those in favor of the motion at hand, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Abstention?

State that you're abstaining.

Abstaining.

Okay, thank you.

I'm in favor. Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Let's move on to application SUBM26-001 HQ5 LLC query.

An application submitted by HQ5 LLC requesting a final subdivision map for Smith's Creek subdivision phase two for the creation of 14 single family residential lots Two and a half acres in size or larger and two remaining parcels for Elko County code title 5 chapter 6 This tentative map was approved several years ago, and we actually did grant an extension of time last summer for this So now they're moving forward with the phase 2 Development they have met all of the requirements or are in the process of meeting all of the requirements set forth from the tentative subdivision Mac now I do recognize that the city comments was requesting some other conditions concerning Paving of North Fifth Street, and then half-width improvements on the future Jennings way We would be moving the goalposts on the applicant if we did that because they've already that those are All the conditions for this were already met or were already established with the tentative map. So with that all being said, I did add one addendum to my conditions. Staff does recommend approval with the following conditions and restrictions. B, at the time of development, or A, at the time of development, the developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of Nevada revised statutes. Elko County Code development criteria and all local building and development requirements pertaining to agricultural residential districts. B, any comments from the Nevada Division of Water Resources, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Nevada Division of State Health, Nevada Public Utilities Commission, Nevada Department of Transportation, and Elko County School District be satisfactorily addressed. It's my understanding they've already got approval from all of said departments, so they're good to go. C, the extension of Catherine Way and Sophia Way be completed within this phase two shall be improved to a 24 foot wide gravel standard with a minimum of six inches of aggregate base per Elko County Road standards prior to the recording of the final subdivision map. D, type and design of the individual septic system shall be approved by the Nevada Division of Health and Nevada Department of Environmental Protection. E, two acre feet of water rights for 15 parcels shall be relinquished to the state of Nevada, making a total of 30 acre feet. They shall be relinquished prior to the recording of the final subdivision map. of Phase 2. This requirement is subject to review and approval from the Nevada Division of Water Resources. And the Division of Water Resources will have to sign the map also before it can record. F. A minimum of a 30,000 gallon fire water storage tank and draft hydrant be installed prior to the recording of the final subdivision map. This requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Elko County Fire Protection District and the State of Nevada Fire Marshal. G, the detention facility on 8 Mile Creek downstream from this project be protected from any adverse impacts on the facility, such as sediment loading during and after any construction. H, 8 Mile Creek is a designated area a designated waters of the U.S. with the federal government. The developer shall comply with all requirements of the state of Nevada and U.S. federal government and obtain any required permits. I. An instrument be in place to ensure the maintenance of the areas designated as open on the proposed subdivision map. J. All constructed and improved roads within the development be constructed to a standard to support a minimum of 75,000 pounds. And that condition is in there at the request of the Fire Protection District. And the addendum, condition K, lots 21 and 22 shall not be permitted access onto the future Jennings Way. And that concludes my conditions. Should be 20 and 21. A little dyslexia moment there, I guess.

I think there was some topography issues along there was one of the... Well, Jennings Way, when it's built out, is going to be a major collector.

It's going to be a major road. They wouldn't want, the city would not want residential access onto it.

Okay, any questions of staff's report?

I am sort of curious about the request for the North 5th Street to be done to the city of Elko Standards. Do you have any background on that?

It's just a wish list.

Okay.

Right now, During phase one, the developer did substantial improvements to North Fifth Street up there. They widened it. They put nine inches of aggregate base down on it to meet county standards. This is out in the county. So really, it's our jurisdiction to govern what their requirements are.

OK. I mean, it makes sense on the Jennings way somewhat. They're proposed Jennings Way because that would be integrated into the city, but this one not, correct?

Yeah, and the thing with Jennings Way, if they were to do that half-width improvements on that portion, God knows how long those improvements would be sitting before they finished Jennings Way. By that time, that would be all decayed and degraded, and they'd have to redo it again anyhow.

Okay, thank you.

All right, is there anyone here that would like to speak on this application?

Mark, I have another question. Okay, go ahead. Are these considered county right-of-way roads for maintenance, or is this up to the subdivision to maintain the roads inside?

The subdivision's going to have to maintain the roads, and there's already a maintenance agreement in place for any future buyers for the maintenance of those roads. So they're under an association or an HOA? Maybe a quasi. association or it may just be a deed restriction with You know with the road maintenance agreement, okay?

All right if there is No one that would like to speak on this let's move forward to a motion Yes

All right, I will make a motion to approve application SUBM26-001 with staff's recommendations, findings, and conditions, along with the addendum.

Second.

Oh, sorry. Oh, sorry. And forwarded to the County Commission.

Second.

All right. We have a motion to move this forward to county commissioners with all of staff's recommendations, conditions, and findings, including the addendum items. And a second from Commissioner Gaworski. Any discussion on the motion as presented? Okay, all those in favor of the motion at hand, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. I'm in favor, motion carries. Application VAR 26-003, Raymond Schroeder. Corey?

An application submitted by Raymond Schroeder requesting a variance for a west side yard setback reduction from 20 feet to 10 feet in an agricultural residential district for a new proposed shop. Location is APN 00609 Foxtrot 082 being Parcel 1, as shown on that certain parcel map for James W. and Jane E. Jennings, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of Elko County, State of Nevada, on October 7, 1995, as file number 375657, then a portion of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 17, Township 34 North, Range 55 East, Mount Diablo Basin Meridians. County of Elko, state of Nevada. Physical address is 1914 Janie Way, Elko, Nevada, 89801. They're wanting to, let's go down here, they're putting in a new shop basically right adjacent to their existing one. And they're just, they're requesting a reduction in that side yard from 20 feet to 10 feet. Staff did not receive any comments from any of the neighbors nor the local a opposition of this So staff does recommend approval with the following Conditions One this variance is subject to restrictions and conditions is outlined in Elko County code four nine five two At the time of development, the developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of Nevada revised statutes, Elko County Code development criteria, and all local building and development requirements pertaining to the proposed residential development and agricultural residential district properties. If said property is sold in whole or otherwise conveyed to a new owner or owner, the deed of conveyance shall contain verbiage that identifies and adopts the recommendations findings, conditions, and requirements of approval of the specific variance and future residential development. Four, the minimum side yard setback shall be 10 feet as applies to the proposed new shop addition as shown in the attached site plan drawing submitted with application number variance. number VAR26-003 included on page three of this report. And that concludes my recommendations and findings. Thank you.

Any questions or query? Anyone that would like to speak on this application? I'm just wondering why you went so small. You could have gone a little wider there and we could have given you a five foot setback. All right. We'll roll with 10, then, if that's the pleasure of the commissioners. We got a motion?

Mr. Chair, I move to accept the variance VAR 26-003 with staff's recommendations, findings, and conditions as presented.

Second.

All right, we have a motion from Commissioner Gaborski to approve this side yard setback reduction to 10 feet and a second from Commissioner Jefferson. Any further discussion on the motion? All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. I'm in favor. Motion carries. Staff update and commissioner comments. Corey, you got anything for us?

Yeah, I would just like to point out that the county commission, that we did receive several appeals on both the conditional use permit out in the Ruby Valley on the Harmon's parcel and also Modern Lands private ski resort. They did hold a special meeting last Monday, May 11th, On that, the commission upheld the planning commission's decisions. They did modify a couple of the conditions for the modern lands one, but nothing substantial. So I think the county commission did an excellent job, and they really felt that this board had done an excellent job in it and really gave this board some kudos.

Do you remember what the?

Conditions the modification on the one of them was as they modified the lighting above the lodge They can't have lighting up there. You know for like maintenance or things like that, but the lights must be turned off When not in use okay? And that's that's the only one that's coming to look that I can really remember right off the top of my head But I think there was another one or two in there, okay? But like I said, there was nothing really substantially different than what this board had.

Was one of them sound during construction? I don't remember. Oh, yeah.

They did modify that to modify that restriction on the decibels to just the chair lifts and the supporting equipment for the chair lifts, which I felt was appropriate. Yeah.

All right. Okay. Thank you. Anything from your commissioners?

Two things. I do have a question for Corey, but first I just want to say thank you to the commission for bearing with me on that disastrous Zoom call last meeting. I didn't realize the camera was on for the first 10 minutes or so. I apologize for you having to see me bump around trying to get stuff loaded up for me. The question I had from Corey is, you know, we had that couple meetings ago, that Thrane Church that was then withdrawn. But I'm hearing some more rumblings from that area. Have you heard anything that we might need to keep an eye on?

What happened there is they went ahead and got their business license for a dude ranch. And so they don't need a conditional use permit anymore.

Okay.

Just as long as we know. It's kind of unfortunate for the people in the area because now we don't get to put any conditions on it.

Yep. Okay. Thank you.

That's out of our hands at this point. Okay.

I'm sure I'll get plenty of phone calls. Yeah.

My concern is I didn't know if there was something else that was going to come back to us that we just needed to watch. So, you know, other than that.

No, there shouldn't be. Okay. I'm sure I'll be dealing with quite a bit of code enforcement with it.

Yeah. From what I'm hearing, there might be even bigger issues, but not for the Planning Commission. So, thank you.

You got anything, Naomi? Nope. Jake? You good? Okay. Comments by the general public pursuant to NRS 241. This time is devoted to comments by the general public. If any in discussion of those comments, no action may be. Upon a matter raised under this item on the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included on a successive agenda and identified to be an action. We have nobody in the audience and I believe we've got nobody on Zoom.