ELKO COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES

Transcription

1 ELKO COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MEETING DATE: September 18, 2008 Members Present...David Hough, Chairman Dave Galyen, Vice Chairman Milt Grisham Mike Judd Dena Hartley Jack D. Larason Absent... Kristian Forland Others Present...Randy Brown, Director Planning and Zoning John Kingwell, Planner/ Code Enforcement Thaysha Groves, Planning & Zoning Administrator Jennifer Spencer, District Attorney s Office Rebekah Anderson, Verizon Wireless Katrinka Russell Tuff Russell The regular meeting of the was called to order at 5:15 P.M. by Chairman Hough on September 18, 2008 in room 105 of the Elko County Courthouse, Elko, Nevada. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Allegiance Pledged. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Hough asked for comments and or a motion concerning the minutes of August 21, Corrections from Commissioner Hartley and Galyen were given to staff. MOTION: Commissioners Galyen moved to accept the minutes of August 21, 2008 with corrections to grammar as submitted to staff. Commissioner Judd made a second to the motion. The motion carried.

2 VOTE: AYE: David Hough, Chairman Dave Galyen, Vice Chairman Milt Grisham Mike Judd Jack Larason Dena Hartley NAY: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Kristian Forland III. COMMENTS BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC: No Comments IV. CONSENT AGENDA: V. PRELIMINARY HEARINGS: Commissioner Hough abstained from this application because he was involved with the company and the gavel was passed to Vice Chairman, Dave Galyen. # , Great Basin Resource Development LLC- a preliminary hearing for change of zoning from Open Space to Special Lands. Mr. Kingwell stated that this parcel may be in the South fork Master Plan and may not be able to be rezoned to special lands. Special lands are believed to be a minimum of 40 acres. He said that he would look into the matter but did recommend that the application move to a public hearing. The application is in order and all fees have been received. Mr. Brown stated that under state statute, the Master Plan or area that does not affect more than 25 percent of the Master Plan area, does not affect the reasoning to amend the Master Plan area. Therefore, the application should go forward to the October meeting. However staff will discuss with the applicant that the property is located in the Master Plan area to see if they would like to proceed, since our recommendation and finding would have to deny the application. So Page 2 of 17

3 therefore, it is up to the applicant to follow through. Also, there is no reason that the Master Plan cannot be amended at this point. MOTION: Commissioner Hartley moved to set the public hearing for application # on October 16, Commissioner Judd made a second to the motion. The motion carried. VOTE: AYE: Dave Galyen, Vice Chairman Milt Grisham Mike Judd Dena Hartley Jack Larason NAY: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Kristian Forland David Hough, Chairman The gavel was passed back to Chairman, David Hough. # , Elko County- A preliminary hearing for a change of zoning from Open Space to M-1 General Industrial. Mr. Kingwell stated that the application is by Elko County and uses have not been identified at this time. It is recommended that this application move forward to public hearing. Fees were waived for this application MOTION: Commissioner Larason moved to set the public hearing for application # to October 16, Commissioner Hartley made a second to the motion. The motion carried. VOTE: AYE: David Hough, Chairman Dave Galyen, Vice Chairman Milt Grisham Mike Judd Dena Hartley Jack Larason NAY: ABSENT: Kristian Forland Page 3 of 17

4 ABSTENTIONS: VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: # , Verizon Wireless- an application for concerning a request for Conditional Use for wireless communication facility co-location including a prefabricated 12 x 20 equipment shelter and 5 x 10 concrete pad and standby generator: Mr. Kingwell read the following staff report into record: STAFF REPORT # CONDITIONAL USE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 18 th, APPLICATION: An application for a Conditional Use within Agriculture / Residential (AR) Zoning submitted by Verizon Wireless Rebekah Anderson, Complete Wireless Consulting with permission granted by the Property Owner of Record Beth Carpel for a Verizon wireless communications facility in a 28 x34 fenced lease area including a 12 x20 equipment shelter, standby diesel generator with a 210 gallon tank, power and telecommunications services to the site, 3 antenna sectors (2) proposed, (2) future antennas per sector and 2 future 8 microwave dishes mounted to an existing tall monopole tower. 2. LOCATION: A portion of the SW 1/4 of Section 17, T. 33 N., R. 57 E, M.D.B.& M.. Physical address is 65 Spring Creek Lane. (Not located within the Spring Creek Subdivision) 3. SUMMARY INFORMATION: Assessor s Parcel No.: Owner(s) of Record: E-009 Beth Carpel PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS ON PROPERTY: Conditional Use Granted May 18, 2006 for Communications Tower, Fenced area & shelters Page 4 of 17

5 SIZE OF PROPERTY: ACCESS: MASTER PLAN: COMMENTS & INFORMATION: 5.56 Acres Spring Creek Lane Spring Creek / Lamoille Master Plan Phase III Attached if applicable 4. PROJECT IMPACTS: A. THE PROPERTY IS ADEQUATE IN SIZE AND SHAPE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY: The 5.56 acre parcel is adequate to accommodate the proposed activity which will be located within a 28'x34' wooden fenced site and accessed by an existing fifteen foot (15') wide driveway that is proposed to be extended approximately 20. The driveway is accessed from Spring Creek Lane approximately 112' west of the residential access driveway. All proposed development is to be encompassed within a 28 x34 fenced area. The mono pole tower is existing. All antennas and dishes will be placed on the existing mono pole. B. STREETS AND/OR ROADS IN THE AREA WILL BE ADEQUATE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY: The streets are adequate to accommodate the proposed. There will be some traffic into the site on a daily basis during the construction phase of the project. Once construction is completed there will be no daily traffic, only monthly maintenance traffic into the area. The site will not be staffed. C. THE EFFECT THE APPLICATION WILL HAVE UPON THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE AREA: 1) There should be limited negative impact upon the health, safety and general welfare of the surrounding area, primarily aesthetic. The installation of the additional antennas will be at a height of 155 and the microwave dishes will be mounted at a height of approximately 90. The 28 x34 fenced in area will be enclosed with an 8 wooden fence. 2) There will be no drinking water or sanitary sewage facilities on site. 3) Predicted radio frequency emissions are not proven to be harmful to the public and are used in everyday electronic appliances like televisions, microwave ovens, and garage door openers. 4) Limited vehicular traffic primarily during construction. Page 5 of 17

6 5) Following construction, there will be one vehicle to the site once weekly for testing and maintenance. This includes the starting and operating of the standby generator for a maximum period of approximately 1 hour. The proposed operating and testing time is between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm. The noise emitted from the generator at a distance of 55 is 53.1 db which is by example, compared to the background noise level of an open office. 6) Storage of Diesel fuel in the quantity of 250 gallons will be stored on site in a double walled fuel tank fitted with a leak detection alarm. 5. CONSISTENCY WITH EXISTING ZONING: The has determined this to be a Conditional Use within (AR) zoning and has granted a previous Conditional Use similar to the proposed. This application falls within the previous application submitted and approved in 2006 on this same property. A lease agreement has been obtained for the additional structure location within a fenced area. 6. STAFF COMMENTS: A) The 5.56 acre parcel and 900 s.f. area will be sufficient in size for the proposed activity which will be located within a wooden fenced 28'x34' site and accessed by an existing fifteen foot (15') wide driveway that is proposed to be extended approximately 20. The driveway is accessed from Spring Creek Lane approximately 112' west of the residential access driveway. All proposed development is to be encompassed within a 28 x34 fenced area. The mono pole tower is existing. All antennas and dishes will be placed on the existing mono pole. B) There will be some traffic into the site on a daily basis during the construction phase of the project. Once construction is completed there will be no need for daily traffic into the area. The site will not be staffed. This facility will have very little, if any impacts upon the existing roads in the area. There will be weekly trips to the site for maintenance and testing of the Emergency backup Generator. C) There should be limited impact upon the health, safety and general welfare of the surrounding area, primarily aesthetic. There will be no outdoor lighting during construction or operation. D) There will minimal noise generated by the testing of the emergency backup generator as stated above in PROJECT IMPACTS C) 5. There will not be any dust or glare Page 6 of 17

7 produced after construction of the site is completed. E) The has determined this to be a Conditional Use within (AR) zoning and has granted a previous conditional uses on this same parcel. F) Prior to the completion of this report comments have been received from the following: 1) Nevada Department of Transportation (no comment) 2) Elko County Sheriff s Office (no comment) 3) Elko County Public Works (no comment) 4) Elko County Highway Department (no comment) 5) Elko County Manager Office (no comment) 6) Elko County School District (no comment) 7) Nevada Division of State Health (no comment) 8) Nevada Division Forestry (no comment) 9) Elko County Building & Safety (no comment) 10) Spring Creek Association (attached comments) 7. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS: Based upon the above findings, staff recommends APPROVAL of this application, subject to the following conditions: A. Construction cannot begin nor building permits issued until a final inspection and approval of existing construction permits are satisfactorily closed out and signed off by the Elko County Building Official for the existing mono pole and other related structures. B. All necessary permits for the proposed shall be obtained prior to improvements being made on the site. C. At time of any development, the developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of N.R.S., Elko County Code and the Uniform Building Code or applicable Building Code for the development criteria that pertain to the proposed development. D. Applicant will provide documentation showing that all requirements of the Federal Aviation administration will be met in reference to this structure. E. At time of any development, applicant shall comply with all Federal, State, and Local building and development requirements. F. At a time when the communications antennas and microwave dishes as part of this application are no longer in use, viable for use or necessary for business of the applicant or any future owner, they are to be removed from the tower at the owners expense. Page 7 of 17

8 G. Communication structures shall be enclosed within a maintained 8 fence as depicted in applicant s submittal. H. Applicant shall submit a legal description of the leased area and a letter from the property owner authorizing the lease. Basis for recommendation: 1) The use conducted at the site will be a necessary component to correct poor reception and service to Verizon Users in the areas of Spring Creek, Portions of Southeast Elko, Along SR 227 (Lamoille Highway), Along SR 706 (Lower Lamoille Highway), Blackstone Drive in Spring Creek, and residences and businesses in the surrounding area. 2) In staff's view the proposed antennas, dishes and equipment structure will be no more obtrusive than the existing like use on the same parcel. 3) There are few sites in rural Elko County, where this operation could be sited that are zoned for industrial uses. Thus, this site requires a conditional use for all additions and improvements to the existing facility. 4) To date, there have been no negative comments received Report prepared by: John W. Kingwell Planner, Elko County Planning & Zoning K:\P&Z - Planning Commission Records\DOCS, STAFF REPORTS\2008 YEAR\ CU to add Antennas & Dishes for Verizon Wireless.doc Mr. Kingwell stated that in addition to the staff report, there will be a weekly generator check and the generator is proposed to run for one hour, once a week. The fuel tank is mounted under the generator. In 2006, the Elko County Commission had determined this area conditional use within (AR) zoning. On May 18, 2006 the Building Department went out to the site to do an inspection and determined that the mono pole was 8 in diameter instead of the proposed 2, which was discussed in the meeting on October 19, Since this inspection and meeting discussing the size of the pole, there was never a final inspection neither scheduled nor completed. There are also some issues with cleanup around the area of the existing pole. Mr. Kingwell also stated that in the application, the applicant is asking for 8 microwave dishes that are intended to be mounted at 90. At 90, the pole is roughly 70 across and the dishes that are proposed, are 96 across which would be a protrusion of about 13 on each side of the pole. The antennas that are proposed are to be set at 155 they are 30 wide. The antenna is 5 to 6 wide at that height which will increase also to about 1 ½ to 2. Page 8 of 17

9 Chairman Hough opened the floor for commissioner questions and concerns. Commissioner Larason asked Mr. Kingwell what some of the issues were with the original permit and the construction of the tower. Mr. Kingwell stated that the final inspection on the construction has not ever been completed. We (staff) have tried to contact Alltel through the records we have in our prior application from two years ago and we have not had any success in doing so to this point. So as of right now, they are operating presently without a final inspection on their work. Commissioner Larason asked what Mr. Kingwell meant by the clean up concern at the site. Mr. Kingwell stated that he had been addressed by Mrs. Katrinka Russell, a resident in the neighborhood, that the contractor had left the site a mess. They tore up the cul-de-sac and parked equipment on her property which destroyed sagebrush. She is going to address the board tonight about those issues. Commissioner Galyen asked if staff has looked at the site. Mr. Kingwell stated that staff has not looked at the site for this permit. Commissioner Galyen asked Ms. Jennifer Spencer (D/A s office), since he is a Verizon Wireless customer, should he abstain from this hearing, she said no. Commissioner Hartley asked staff if there was an expiration time on the construction permit if there is no final. Mr. Kingwell stated that he thought they had 180 days to get the final and then the applicant needs to renew the permit, because it then expired. Commissioner Hartley asked if the applicant has come in to renew. Mr. Kingwell stated that they have not, so the construction permit has expired and is unsure what the building official will do at this point. Commissioner Hartley stated that she would like the original applicant to take care of the issues and asked what leverage the commission had. Mr. Kingwell commented that a new project cannot begin on a site that hasn t been finalized. Commissioner Grisham commented that he had heard that Verizon had bought out Alltel and if this was true, wouldn t Alltel be responsible for the issues. Mr. Kingwell stated that in speaking with Ms. Rebekah Anderson, the Verizon representative, she was going to get in contact with the original Contractor and we (staff) would do the same. Commissioner Judd stated that this issue could be clarified in a motion by stating that the issues be handled prior to the Conditional Use. Commissioner Hough asked if there were any structures near this tower other than the equipment shelter and the generator. Mr. Kingwell stated that there were two homes located in the area. Commissioner Hough asked how close the houses were. The Russell s live on the other side of the cul-de-sac which puts them at least 60 away with a 50 set back, plus another 50 set back, so the closest they could be is about 160. Commissioner Hough commented that the biggest problem he had with the tower was ice buildup. He mentioned that he is worried that if ice were to build up and thaw out, and is concerned about what the damage could do to the homes located in the area. Mr. Kingwell stated that the home in the map they were referring to was about 140 to 150. Mr. Kingwell stated that he never anticipated this and recommended that the engineers could provide some information. Commissioner Hartley asked if the maps were an end result of everything in the application. Mr. Kingwell stated that it was, some antennas on the map are for future antenna use. Commissioner Grisham asked if this was identical to what Alltel did a few years ago and we approved that Conditional Use. Mr. Kingwell stated that they are just adding the additional antennas. In the resolution and motion made on the Alltel application, any additions added needed to be approved because there was a lot of public comment. Page 9 of 17

10 Commissioner Hough asked if there were any more comments or questions by commissioners or staff. Commissioner Hough opened the floor for public comment. Rebekah Anderson, representative of Verizon Wireless, stated that she wanted to ask for the approval of this application and wanted to answer any questions. Ms. Anderson stated that she was informed by Mr. Kingwell that Alltel never got a final inspection. She mentioned that they were trying to contact Alltel but Verizon is prepared to do whatever steps are necessary to finalize their permit. This would happen before we are granted our final building permit, which is a Conditional Use that is listed in the approval. She stated that Verizon has bought out Alltel, as per this site, no equipment will change and the permit is still very valid. Commissioner Hartley asked if this would improve the public s service over the summit. Ms. Anderson stated that the service would increase over the summit and Lamoille Road. Ms. Anderson mentioned that when they were considering development of this site, they had looked at several options for putting a wireless facility in the area. Instead of putting up a new tower, Verizon thought it would be more beneficial rather to co-locate than add another tower to the area. Commissioner Galyen asked how the proposed dishes were shaped, since there is a concern with ice. Ms. Anderson stated that the microwave dishes can have a dip in the shape but they will be facing directional out. They aren t protruding out very far and the existing tower is surrounded by open field. There is an existing microwave dish on the tower right now, smaller than the proposed. Commissioner Galyen asked if the antennas were like the microwave dishes in shape. Ms. Anderson stated that they are called panel antennas, they are long ways and not even quit a foot long. Verizon is proposing a total of twelve antenna panels, six now and six in the future. Commissioner Hartley commented that she also had a concern with snow and ice build up on the dishes and antennas. Mr. Brown stated that the towers and antennas were designed so that no flat surfaces collect ice. The microwave dishes are concave, meaning all moisture is against a metal surface and any sunlight of any kind will cause ice and snow to melt. Commissioner Hartley commented that she compared the shape of these microwave dishes to the dish at her home. Mr. Brown stated that the dishes at home are most likely pointed at a 40 degree angle and the microwave dishes are flat and are pointing outward. He mentioned that ice buildup was also a concern of the staff, so this is all put in the design. Commissioner Hough asked if there were any further comments from the public. Katrinka Russell, property owner that lives right next to Beth Carpel. She stated that there were conditions set upon putting up the tower and is concerned because they are not being met. She stated that there was a study to prove that the tower would not affect her land line phone, but two years later she is unable to use it. She requests that the conditions be met from the Conditional Use before anything further happens to the site. She asks that the mess be cleaned up that was made when the construction of the tower was done. Her property was tore up when the easement was being dug up and they tore up sagebrush on her property. There was also concrete dumped down Spring Creek Lane and was never cleaned up. She stated that she asked that they keep Page 10 of 17

11 things clean and nice around the area. She asked that if this application is approved that the commission place conditions on them. This is a commercial enterprise in the middle of a residential neighborhood that the residents take pride in. Commissioner Galyen asked if trees were part of the agreement. Mr. Kingwell stated that in the minutes of October 19, 2006 Alltel asked for clarification to be set on landscaping and according to the minutes, nothing was ever set. Ms. Russell provided pictures of the damage done to her property and the noted road (see file). Mr. Kingwell read from a letter dated June 29, 2007 from Alltel, Beverly Kinison to Ms. Russell. On the first page, third paragraph: Mr. Brown indicated there was also a concern about the landscaping request mentioned in the hearing. A letter copy (copy attached) was sent to you on 10/31/06 with the original report, stating that if you desire additional landscaping to shield the Alltel tower, notification should be received in writing to my attention no later than 1/1/07. I have reverified my notes of the hearing, plus Attorney Jim Copenahaven has confirmed that this was a requirement stated in the hearing. In his documentation he showed that Bev agreed to furnish some landscaping, provided that she is advised by the home owner of what landscaping she might be requesting by Jan 1. Alltel never received notification from you that you desired additional landscaping, so none has been provided. Alltel has fulfilled the requirements as stated in the 10/19/06 Elko County Planning & Zoning Hearing. Mr. Kingwell then read the letter that Alltel was responding to, dated October 31, 2006, Attention Scott (Randy) Brown, reference to 10/19/06 Elko County Planning & Zoning Hearing. Dear Mr. Brown, during the hearing held on 10/19/06 in Elko Nevada, discussion was held on the health concerns of Mrs. Katrinka Russell. Based upon discussion during that hearing, a formal report was to be ordered by Alltel Communications to be delivered to the County no later than Wednesday, November 8, Copies of that report will be Federal Expressed to your attention today. A copy will also be sent to Mrs. Russell. An additional condition of the hearing was that Mrs. Russell was to determine no later than January 1, 2007 if any landscaping would be required to shield the view of the tower from her residence. If Mr. and Mrs. Russell desire additional landscaping to shield the Alltel tower, notification should be received in writing to my attention no later than 1/1/07. Sincerely Beverly Kinison. Commissioner Galyen asked Ms. Russell if she ever wrote them a letter requesting additional landscaping. Ms. Russell stated that she tried to contact Ms. Beverly Kinison and was told that no one had contacted Alltel by the January 1, 2007 date and all requirements were met. Commissioner Galyen asked if any landscaping had been done at all because the letter stated they needed to do additional landscaping. Ms. Russell stated no landscaping had been done. Mr. Kingwell stated that Ms. Kinison asked for clarification on the landscaping at the October 2006 meeting and none was given. Page 11 of 17

12 Mr. Kingwell read the resolution from the Alltel permit, paragraph six: A. All necessary permits shall be obtained prior to improvements being made on the site. B. At time of any development, the developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of N.R.S., Elko County Code and the Uniform Building Code or applicable Building Code for the development criteria that pertain to the proposed development. C. Applicant will provide documentation showing that all requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration will be met in reference to this structure. (If applicable) D. At time of any development, applicant shall comply with all Federal State, and Local building and development requirements. Mr. Kingwell stated that the resolution is a result of what is spoken in the motion. Commissioner Grisham asked Mr. Kingwell to explain the driveway extension on the Carpel property proposed in the plans. Mr. Kingwell responded that they want to extend access to the additional proposed structure. Commissioner Hartley asked how the driveway was being maintained. Ms. Russell stated that they are not maintaining the road. Commissioner Grisham asked that Ms. Rebekah Anderson could come back to the podium for a few questions. Commissioner Grisham asked if Ms.Anderson was in the position to authorize the completion of these conditions that Alltel did not meet. Ms. Anderson stated that as discussed, the conditional uses have been met. She stated that she would be able to except a condition that the driveway on the private land be maintained. Commissioner Grisham stated that the site has not been maintained as per the conditions in the motion. Ms. Anderson stated that she wanted conditions to be very specific on what is needed. Commissioner Hartley stated that she was not impressed with the property and low maintenance. Ms. Anderson stated that this was a matter with Alltel and no letter was written about the issues. She commented that since this was with Alltel and it took place a couple years ago, she was surprised that this was an issue now. Ms. Anderson stated that Verizon is willing to finalize Alltel s permit but they need to specify on what needs to be done. Mr. Brown stated that in the original application with Alltel, the staff report was completed by him. There were promises made that were inclusive of landscaping, maintenance of the facility and to this date they have not fulfilled the conditional uses. We as staff are prepared to pull the conditional use until it is finalized on the building permit. There was also a trespassing issue to obtain easement right. There were several correspondence sent to the representative in Arizona, she refused to note our concerns. When this project first came in, landscaping was shown on the proposal and then in the second hearing Ms. Kinison stated that there was never any landscaping proposed. Mr. Brown commented, as staff, he is instructing the commission to either table this issue or deny the conditional use until the owners of this tower handle the issues. Commissioner Galyen asked Ms. Russell if she showed utility easement on her property on the plat map in Spring Creek. Ms. Russell stated that the easement set between her property and another property and they came down the easement and crossed to the tower on her property. Commissioner Galyen asked if Spring Creek Lane or the cul-de-sac belonged to the Spring Creek Association. Mr. Brown stated that Spring Creek Association does not own this property, they are public right of ways and owned by the public. The easement is a public utilities easement and drainage easements. Page 12 of 17

13 Commissioner Grisham stated that Alltel proposed a 2 pole and then put up an 8 pole and said that they would put trees in. Mr. Brown stated there is a cease and desist order being issued based on that fact. Commissioner Grisham commented that since Alltel would put up landscaping we, the commission, approved the conditional use. Mr. Brown stated that this is going on three years and there is an outstanding building permit and that does not meet the conditions that were stated in the staff report. Commissioner Hartley mentioned that the permit was expired. Mr. Brown stated that they are under operation and under National Telecommunications Act (NTCA) we cannot shut them down. They are asking for more and if the prior conditions can t be completed why should they be issued more. Mr. Brown asked that they put it in writing what they are willing to do and until that is done, this conditional use should not be considered. Mr. Kingwell read from the staff report for Alltel, # page 3 under staff s recommendations, findings and conditions. A. All necessary permits shall be obtained prior to improvements being made on the site. B. At time of any development, the developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of N.R.S., Elko County Code and the Uniform Building Code or applicable Building Code for the development criteria that pertains to the proposed development. C. Applicant will provide documentation showing that all requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration will be met in reference to this structure. (if applicable ) D. At time of any development, applicant shall comply with all Federal, State, and Local building and development requirements. Tuff Russell, neighboring property owner and husband to Ms. Katrinka Russell, wanted to address Commissioner Hartley s question about the damage to the road. He stated that there was damage on the chip paved road. There are pot holes and the entire road needs to be redone, leaving all the residents to deal with the aftermath. Commissioner Hartley commented that the contractor has a responsibility to repair the road and they should get with Spring Creek Association on that matter. Another big issue that Mr. Russell deals with is that their land line phone does not work right. They were told by Alltel that the tower would not affect their land line and from day one his wife has not been able to use it. Commissioner Hartley asked if the commissioners denied this application, would Verizon have to reapply and pay more fees. Commissioner Hough stated that they would have to wait a year to reapply. Mr. Brown stated that there were a few ways to handle this situation. This application could either be tabled or there can be more conditions placed on the existing conditional use. He mentioned that since Verizon will accept responsibility of this facility and will have to deal with the conditions that are placed. He suggested that if it was tabled, that would give staff time to look over all the issues and the conditions be clear as to what Verizon needs to do as far as Page 13 of 17

14 maintenance, cleaning, etc. Mr. Kingwell stated he wanted the opportunity to go out and take a look at the site. Commissioner Hough asked if there was anything new that the public would like to discuss. Ms. Anderson stated that as the applicant, she would like to see the application to be approved tonight with conditions to satisfy what the commission. Commissioner Hough closed the floor for public comment. Commissioner Grisham stated that he wanted to see that Verizon fulfill the conditions that were not met by Alltel. Commissioner Galyen commented that when he was on the Spring Creek Association board of Architecture we had a contractor remove the concrete from the road and as a result of that pot holes were left in the road. Commissioner Larason said that it appeared Verizon was riding on the shoulders of Alltel. As far as moving things along with conditions is rushing things. Staff needs to get together and look over things, Mr. Kingwell needs to make an inspection and Spring Creek Association needs to evaluate the road so that Verizon knows what is expected of them. He stated that he would be prone to tabling this issue until all matters have been looked at. Commissioner Hartley stated that she was leaning both ways, more in the direction of tabling the application and agrees with Commissioner Larason s comments. She also commented that whatever is to be decided, that it be put into writing. Commissioner Hough commented that since Verizon bought the asset, they acquired the obligations that went with it. He stated that he was in support of staff looking the issues over and all past issues be dealt with before anything new can be done to the facility. Commissioner Grisham commented that unless Verizon knows exactly what is expected of them, setting this off to another date won t do a thing. Commissioner Galyen stated that in one of the hearings with Alltel, Commissioner Judd requested a study that guaranteed there would be no interference. So do we look at documentation that was received or do we go off of what the Russell s are saying about the interference in their land line? He asked how we resolve that issue. Mr. Brown stated that at this point and time those issues are resolved. This commission required those reports twice and both times the reports came back negative cause. Unless we, the county, are willing to pay for a third party, we have already accepted the reports given. Commissioner Hough commented that an appeal to the FCC would be a good way to resolve the land line issue. Mr. Brown stated that the reports were done by the FCC. Commissioner Judd stated the conditions that were given have not been met. That being said, we do not have enough information to move forward and as a result of that this application should be tabled. He stated that he would like to see staff go to the property, note what needs to be done, make recommendations on landscaping that was agreed to by Alltel and look at damage to the road and anyone else s property. He requested that this be done by the next meeting, October 16, Since Verizon wants to put these dishes up, they will want to work with the county and with the home owners. He commented that if Verizon wasn t willing to work with the County or local homeowners, he wanted to see the conditional use be pulled completely. MOTION: Commissioner Judd motioned to table # Verizon Wireless, with Staff s Page 14 of 17

15 recommendations, conditions, findings and the following conditions. (1) Staff inspects property and note what needs to be done as far as maintenance; clean up, etc. (2) Staff also makes recommendations on landscaping. (3) Road and neighboring resident s property be looked at for any damaged and noted. Commissioner Hartley seconded the motion. VOTE: AYE: David Hough, Chairman Dave Galyen, Vice Chairman Milt Grisham Mike Judd Dena Hartley Jack Larason NAY: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Kristian Forland VII. OTHER BUSINESS (A) Discussion and Possible action to establish an attendance policy for the Elko County Planning Commission. Commissioner Galyen stated that he prepared a proposed resolution that could get the commission started and come up with an idea on this matter. Mr. Brown commented that he had spoken with Ms. Kristin McQueary (DA S Office) about this issue and she stated that the Wildlife Advisory Board has a policy that is written into their code which states that if a member misses three unexcused meetings they are dismissed. The issue is determining what is unexcused. If a phone call is made stating you as the member will not be able to make the meeting that would be excused. If the staff calls a member and gets no response back and doesn t make the meeting that seems to be unexcused. Mr. Brown commented that he feels if a member cannot make a meeting to call and that would be ok to a certain extent. Commissioner Hartley stated that even though the Spring Creek Board of directors, in the by-laws, if they miss three consecutive meetings they are done. She recommended that if three consecutive meetings are missed with this commission then the member be removed by the county commissioners, since they appoint the planning commissioners. Commissioner Hough asked Mr. Brown if the County Manager could remove a member. Mr. Brown stated that the planning commission is appointed by the county commissioners. County managers and department heads can make recommendations to the commissioners but that is it. Commissioner Hough commented that the Planning Commission as a whole can make a request of resignation or termination. Mr. Brown stated that as per Ms. McQueary as a board, you are allowed to create your own policy. Mr. Brown commented that he liked Commissioner Galyen s resolution that states if five are missed Page 15 of 17

16 in one year. This should be looked at as yearly bases as well; a member could miss two in a row five times. Commissioner Judd commented that there should be some leeway as to what determines a dismissal. Commissioner Hough stated that as a personal responsibility, if a member cannot attend meetings regularly, then step aside. Commissioner Galyen asked if the resolution should be read into the record. Mr. Brown suggested that it be read into record and Ms. McQueary can suggest that it be revised. If it would need revised then it will be placed on October 16, 2008 meeting. Chairman Hough read the following into record: Whereas; the has had a problem of having a quorum present at some meetings in the past. Whereas; this creates an inconvenience to citizens attending the meeting, to speak in favor of or against an agenized item, the applicants that appear, a burden on staff and attending commissioners. Whereas; this is an economic impact on the county to pay for travel expenses of commissioners when a quorum was not present; this is a waste of resources and a bookkeeping inconvenience for the Planning Commission Secretary to keep records of attendees, when no business can be conducted. Therefore, let it be resolved that if any member of the misses three meetings in a row or misses five (5) meetings within one (1) calendar year (January thru December) without notifying a staff member of their intent to be absent, the Planning Commissioners Secretary shall notify the governing body of such members absences and recommend that such member shall immediately be relieved of their position on the Elko County Planning Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Galyen made a motion to adopt this policy and have staff insert the appropriate language into the Rules and, if necessary, recommend a do pass to our governing body. Commissioner Judd seconded the motion. VOTE: AYE: David Hough, Chairman Dave Galyen, Vice Chairman Milt Grisham Mike Judd Dena Hartley Jack Larason NAY: ABSENT: Kristian Forland Page 16 of 17

17 Meeting Minutes of September 18,2008 ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Kristian Forland (B) Discussion and consideration of changes to Elko County Code Title S. Mr. Brown stated that staff is going to be looking at development criteria for parcel maps, subdivisions and division ofland large parcels. He mentioned that he planned this to carry through the winter and by spring maybe we would have things to take to the county commissioners. For the October meeting we will be focusing on the 26' wide rural gravel road standard. We have had some requests to reduce the standard in minimum. Weare preparing reports and we want your thoughts and opinions. Commissioner Galyen requested that Mrs. Thaysha Groves an attachment oftitle 5. Commissioner Hartley asked if fencing requirements would be brought up at this time. Mr. Brown stated that zoning codes will come into issue with all of these matters. VIII. STAFF AND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS: Mr. Brown introduced Mrs. Thaysha Groves, the Planning & Zoning Administrator. He stated that she is the new Planning Commission secretary. He mentioned that she administrates everything that comes into the door for the planning & zoning department and she will also be helping with Natural Resource development committee. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Hough adjourned the meeting as there was no further business. Minutes Cler~{JLLJ~ - 611tl.llA.J ~Groves Date Approved_I---'-()--1/_L_3=-+/-=-D...Q~ _ K:\P&Z - Planning Commission Records\DOCS, M1NUTES\2008 YEAR\ ECPC Minutes.doc Page 17 of17